ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY REGIONAL AND LOCAL DEVELOPMENT STUDIES [RLDS] SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS OF URBAN HOUSEHOLD COOKING ENERGY CONSUMPTION PATTERN: THE CASE OF WOLDIA TOWN, NORTH WOLLO ADMINISTRATIVE ZONE. ADVISOR: - PROFESSOR KASHI.N.SINGH Prepared by: - Worku Gashaw January 2004 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY
REGIONAL AND LOCAL DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
[RLDS]
SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS OF URBAN HOUSEHOLD COOKING
ENERGY CONSUMPTION PATTERN: THE CASE OF WOLDIA TOWN,
NORTH WOLLO ADMINISTRATIVE ZONE.
ADVISOR: - PROFESSOR KASHI.N.SINGH
Prepared by: - Worku Gashaw
January 2004 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Addis Ababa University
Research and Graduate Program Office
Regional and Local Development Studies.
[RLDS]
SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS OF URBAN HOUSEHOLD COOKING
ENERGY CONSUMPTION PATTERN: THE CASE OF WOLDIA TOWN,
NORTH WOLLO ADMINISTRATIVE ZONE.
A thesis submitted to the research and graduate program office Addis Ababa
University, Regional and Local Development Studies in partial fulfillment of the
requirement of Degree of Masters in Regional and Local Development Studies
Advisor: - Professor Kashi.N.Singh
Prepared by: - Worku Gashaw
January 2004
ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY
RESEARCH AND GRADUATE PROGRAM OFFICE
REGIONAL AND LOCAL DEVELOPMENT STUDIES (RLDS)
SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS OF URBAN HOUSEHOLD COOKING ENERGY
CONSUMPTION PATTERN: THE CASE OF WOLDIA TOWN,
NORTH WOLLO ADMINISTRATIVE ZONE.
A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE RESEARCH AND GRADUATE PROGRAM OFFICE
ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY, REGIONAL AND LOCAL DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
(RLDS) IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT OF DEGREE OF
MASTERS OF ARTS IN REGIONAL AND LOCAL DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
APPROVED BY BOARD OF EXAMINERS
Signature Date
1. Tegegn G/Egziabher (PHD.) _________________ __________________
(Chairman, Graduate Committee)
2. Professor Kashi.N.Singh _________________ __________________
(Advisor)
3. Tesfaye Shiferaw (PHD.) _________________ __________________
4. Workneh Negatu (PHD.) _________________ __________________
I
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to express my deep whole-hearted gratitude and indebtedness to my research
advisor Professor Kashi.N.Singh for his skillful and valuable support throughout the course of
this work. His critical and valuable comments, suggestions and advice are worthy enough to
be mentioned here. Without his support and endless understanding, this paper would not have
had its present shape. He deserves my special thanks.
I owe special debt to the teaching, administrative and supporting staff of the Regional and
Local Development Studies (RLDS) program at Faculty of Business and Economics, Addis
Ababa University, for the full support they provided me. I owe particularly to Dr. Tegegne
G/Egziabher, the program coordinator for his constant support and encouragement.
I gratefully acknowledge the moral support and encouragement that I have obtained from my
friends W/t Azeb Merawi and Ato Eskinder Sheferaw. Their moral support was an engine of
my life and a deriving force to reach at this point.
I am also very much indebted to the technical, administrative and supporting staff members of
North Wollo Zone Administrative Office, North Wollo Finance and Economic Development
Branch Office, all the respective 8 Kebele Administrations of Woldia town and the Federal
Rural Energy Development and Promotion Center in particular to Ato Mekonnen Kassa and
the late Ato Tenagne Taddese who helped me to get access to documentary sources relevant
to the study. I am also especially indebted to those people who sacrificed a great length of
their precious time in providing me with the necessary data through interview and
discussions.
I wish also to thank all my friends in all walks of life, for their constant support. I would like
to mention in particular Ato Abebe Fentaw, Ato Seid Yassin, Ato Atkilt Daniel, Ato Worku
Eshetu, Ato Birhane Kebede, Ato Yilma Abebe and Ato Mesfin Taddese, who assisted me in
all aspects of this research work. And finally yet significantly, I wish to extend my gratitude
to the Amhara National Regional State in particular to the Regional Finance and Economic
Development Bureau, the organization which sponsored me to attend the postgraduate
program RLDS at Faculty of Business and Economics, Addis Ababa University.
Worku Gashaw W/Amanuel
Addis Ababa University
II
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT............................................................................................... I TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................. II LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................................IV
LIST OF FIGURES.....................................................................................................VI LIST OF ANNEXES ..................................................................................................VII ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................VIII GLOSSARY ...............................................................................................................IX
ABSTRACT ...............................................................................................................XII CHAPTER ONE .......................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Introduction.................................................................................................................1
1.2. Statement of the Problem............................................................................................3
1.3. Research Objective .....................................................................................................5
1.4. Significance of the Study............................................................................................5
1.5. Research Questions.....................................................................................................7
1.6. Factors Considered .....................................................................................................8
1.7. Methods of Data Collection and Analysis ..................................................................9
1.7.1. Selection of the Study Town...............................................................................9
1.7.2. Sampling Method..............................................................................................10
1.7.3. Methods of Data Collection..............................................................................11
1.7.4. Methods of Data Analysis.................................................................................12
1.8. Limitations of the Study ...........................................................................................13
1.9. Organization of the Paper .........................................................................................13
CHAPTER TWO........................................................................................................ 14
LITERATURE REVIEW............................................................................................. 14 2.1. Overview of Energy Resource and Consumption.....................................................14
2.2. Biomass For Energy..................................................................................................19
2.3. Household Energy and Inter Fuel Substitution.........................................................22
2.4. Biomass Fuel and Environment................................................................................26
2.5. Energy Resources and Consumption Patterns in Ethiopia........................................31
2.5.1. Energy Resources in Ethiopia...........................................................................31
2.5.2. Energy Consumption Patterns in Ethiopia........................................................35
CHAPTER THREE.................................................................................................... 38
GENERAL BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY AREA ................................................ 38 3.1. Physical Setting.........................................................................................................38
3.1.1. Location and Area.............................................................................................38
3.1.2. Topography and Soils .......................................................................................38
3.1.3. Climate..............................................................................................................39
3.1.4. Land Use Patterns .............................................................................................40
3.2. Socio-Economic Setting ...........................................................................................40
3.2.1. Population .........................................................................................................40
3.2.2. Administrative Framework and Settlement Patterns ........................................41
3.2.3. Infrastructure.....................................................................................................42
3.3. Forest Resource Base of the Region.........................................................................44
3.4. Household Energy Demand in North Wollo Zone ...................................................46
3.5. Description of the Study Town.................................................................................49
3.5.1. Location ............................................................................................................49
3.5.2. Climate..............................................................................................................49
III
3.5.3. Demographic Characteristics............................................................................50
3.5.4. Activities in the Town.......................................................................................50
3.5.5. Basic Service Delivery......................................................................................51
3.5.6. Housing.............................................................................................................51
CHAPTER FOUR...................................................................................................... 52
SURVEY FINDINGS ................................................................................................. 52 4.1. Household Characteristics ........................................................................................52
4.1.1. Age-Sex Distribution of Sample Household Population ..................................52
4.1.2. Household Composition ...................................................................................53
4.1.3. Monthly Household Income .............................................................................53
4.1.4. Housing Characteristics ....................................................................................54
4.1.5. Educational Status of the Household Head.......................................................54
4.1.6. Employment Status ...........................................................................................55
4.2. Characteristics of Household Energy Consumption.................................................56
4.2.1. Fuel Sources......................................................................................................56
4.2.2. Principal Fuel Used...........................................................................................57
4.3. Households Fuel Acquisition....................................................................................60
4.3.1. Acquisition of Biomass Fuel ............................................................................60
4.3.2. Acquisition of Modern Fuel..............................................................................61
4.4. Stove Types...............................................................................................................62
4.4.1. Types of Stoves for Injera Baking....................................................................62
4.4.2. Types of Stoves Used for Cooking...................................................................64
4.5. Prevalence of Biomass Fuel Shortage ......................................................................65
4.6. Household Energy Balance.......................................................................................67
4.6.1. Total Energy Used by the Household...............................................................67
4.6.2. Biomass Fuel in the Household Energy Balance..............................................68
4.6.3. Modern Energy Use in the Household Energy Balance ...................................70
4.7. Expenditure on Fuel..................................................................................................72
4.7.1. Energy Budget Share ........................................................................................72
4.7.2. Total Fuel Expenditure .....................................................................................74
4.7.3. Fuel Expenditure on Biomass Fuel...................................................................76
4.7.4. Fuel Expenditure on Modern Fuel ....................................................................77
4.8. Factors of Energy Use Pattern ..................................................................................79
4.8.1. Electric Meter Acquisition and Determinant Variables....................................79
4.8.2. Domestic Energy Use and Determinant Variable.............................................81
4.8.3. Fuel Expenditure and Determinant Variables...................................................90
CHAPTER FIVE........................................................................................................ 96
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION .............................................................................. 96
REFERENCES........................................................................................................ 102
IV
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: - Ethiopia’s Energy Resources…………………………………………….. 32
Table 2.2: - Volume and Value of Petroleum Import in Ethiopia for the Period
1995/96-1999/2000………………………………………………………. 34
Table 2.3: - Ethiopia National Energy Balance Summary, 1992/93(000TOE)……….. 36
Table 2.4: - The National Household Energy Balance Summary in Ethiopia
1992/93 (000TOE)………………………………………………………... 37
Table 3.1: - The Altitudinal Range, Mean Daily Temperature and Area Coverage
of Temperature Zones in North Wollo Zone……………………………… 40
Table 3.2: - Population Distribution of North Wollo Zone by Broad Age Group,
Sex and Place of Residences, 2002……………………………………..…. 41
Table 3.3: - The Forest Resource Bases and its Coverage in the Amhara National
Regional State, 1999…………………………………………………….… 45
Table 3.4: - Housing Units of North Wollo Zone and Woldia Town by Major
Types of Fuel for Cooking, 1994…………………………………………. 46
Table 3.5: - Sustainable Wood Production, Demand-Supply Balance in the
Amhara Region by Zone, 1999…………………………………………… 48
Table 4.1: - Age Sex Distribution of Members of Sample Households, 2003………… 52
Table 4.2: - Headship Patterns of the Sample Households, 2003……………………… 53
Table 4.3: - Monthly Income of Sample Households in Birr by Headship, 2003……… 53
Table 4.4: - Tenure Status of Sample Households Housing Unit by Number
of Rooms of the Housing Unit, 2003……………………………………… 54
Table 4.5: - Educational Level of Heads of Sample Households, 2003……………….. 55
Table 4.6: - Employment Status of Heads of Sample Households, 2003……………… 56
Table 4.7: - Fuel Sources of Sample Households, 2003……………………………….. 57
Table 4.8: - Principal Fuel Type Used for the Major Types of End Uses by the
Sample Households, 2003………………………………………………… 58
Table 4.9: - Sources of Biomass Fuel Supplies for the Sample Households, 2003……. 60
Table 4.10: - Sources of Kerosene for the Sample Households, 2003…………………… 61
Table 4.11: - Sample Household Electric Meter Connection, 2003……………………… 62
Table 4.12: - Types of Domestic Appliances Used by Sample Households for
Injera Baking, 2003…………………………………………………….…. 63
Table 4.13: - Sample Households Mitad Usage by Number of Rooms of the
Housing Units, 2003…………………………………………………….… 64
Table 4.14: - Types of Domestic Appliances Used by Sample Households for
Non-Injera End Uses, 2003……………………………………………….. 65
Table 4.15: - Sample Households Response on the Prevalence of Biomass Fuel
Shortage in Woldia, 2003……………………………………………….… 66
Table 4.16: - Season of the Year Biomass Fuel Shortage Happen, 2003…………….…. 66
Table 4.17: - Sample Household Monthly Biomass Fuel Consumption in Kg
and Mega Joules, 2003……………………………………………….…… 69
Table 4.18: - Sample Households Monthly Modern Fuel Consumption in
mega-joules, 2003……………………………………………………… 71
Table 4.19: - Sample Households Monthly-Total Fuel Expenditure for Domestic
Cooking, 2003……………………………………………………………. 75
Table 4.20: - Sample Households Monthly Fuel Expenditure for Biomass Fuel
in Birr, 2003………………………………………………………………. 76
V
Table 4.21: - Sample Households Monthly Fuel Expenditure for Modern Energy
in Birr, 2003…………………………………………………………….… 78
Table 4.22: - Electric Meter Availability by House Tenure Status of Sample
Households, 2003………………………………………………………… 79
Table 4.23: - Electric Meter Availability by Headship Patterns of the Household
Head, 2003………………………………………………………….…….. 80
Table 4.24: - Electric Meter Availability by Monthly Household Income of Sample
Households, 2003………………………………………………………… 80
Table 4.25: - Monthly Total Cooking Energy Use in MJ by Sample Household Size,
2003………………………………………………………………………. 81
Table 4.26: - Monthly Total Cooking Energy Use in MJ by Sample Household
Income, 2003……….…………………………………………………….. 82
Table 4.27: - Monthly Total Cooking Energy Use In MJ by Tenure Status of Sample
Households, 2003…………………………………………………………. 83
Table 4.28: - Monthly Total Cooking Energy Use in MJ by Kitchen Availability of
Sample Households, 2003………………………………………………… 84
Table 4.29: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Use in MJ by Sample Household
Size, 2003…………………………………………………………………. 84
Table 4.30: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Use in MJ by Sample Household Income,
2003……………………………………………………………………….. 85
Table 4.31: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Use in MJ by House Tenure Status of
Sample Household, 2003………………………………………………….. 86
Table 4.32: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Use in MJ by Kitchen Availability of
Sample Households, 2003…………………………………………………. 87
Table 4.33: - Monthly Kerosene Use in MJ by Sample Household Size, 2003…………. 88
Table 4.34: - Monthly Kerosene Use in MJ by Sample Household Income, 2003……… 88
Table 4.35: - Monthly Kerosene Use in MJ by Tenure Status of Sample Households,
2003………………………………………………………………………. 89
Table 4.36: - Monthly Kerosene Use in MJ by Kitchen Availability of Sample
Households, 2003………………………………………………………… 90
Table 4.37: - Monthly Total Fuel Expenditure in Birr by Sample Household Size,
2003………………………………………………………………………. 90
Table 4.38: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Expenditure in Birr by Sample Household
Size, 2003…………………………………………………………………. 91
Table 4.39: - Monthly Kerosene Expenditure in Birr by Sample Household Size,
2003………………………………………………………………………. 91
Table 4.40: - Monthly Total Fuel Expenditure in Birr by Sample Household Income,
2003………………………………………………………………………. 92
Table 4.41: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Expenditure in Birr by Sample Household
Income, 2003……………………………………………………………… 92
Table 4.42: - Monthly Kerosene Expenditure in Birr by Sample Household Income,
2003……………………………………………………………………….. 92
Table 4.43: - Monthly Total Fuel Expenditure in Birr by House Tenure Status of
Sample Households, 2003…………………………………………………. 93
Table 4.44: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Expenditure in Birr by House Tenure
Status of Sample Households, 2003……………………………………….. 93
Table 4.45: - Monthly Kerosene Expenditure in Birr by House Tenure Status of
Sample households, 2003………………………………………………….. 94
Table 4.46: - Monthly Total Fuel Expenditure in Birr by Kitchen Availability of
Sample Households, 2003…………………………………………………. 94
VI
Table 4.47: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Expenditure in Birr by Kitchen Availability
of Sample Households, 2003……………………………………………… 95
Table 4.48: - Monthly Kerosene Expenditure in Birr by Kitchen Availability of Sample
Households, 2003………………………………………………………… 95
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1: - Total Primary Energy Demand in 1990 for Sub Saharan Africa………… 19
Figure 4.1: - Sample Household Energy Budget Share as Percent of Total
Expenditure, 2003………………………………………………………… 73
VII
LIST OF ANNEXES
Annex I: - Questioner------------------------------------------------------------------ 105
Annex II: - Biomass Fuel Weight Survey Format---------------------------------- 113
Annex III: - Checklists for Key Informants and Focus Group Discussion------- 113
Annex IV: - Biomass Fuel Weight Survey Result and Conversion Factors------ 114
Annex V: - Conversion Factor Calorific values (Energy Contents) of
Domestic Fuels Sources (MJ/Kg)--------------------------------------- 114
Annex VI: - Conversion Factor for Electric------------------------------------------- 115
Annex VII: - Sample household monthly expenditure made for household
cooking in Birr, 2003------------------------------------------------------ 115
Annex VIII: - Descriptive Statistics: Sample households’ monthly biomass
fuel consumption in Kg for household cooking, 2003---------------- 115
Annex IX: - Descriptive Statistics: Sample households’ monthly
fuel consumption in MJ for household cooking, 2003---------------- 116
Annex X: - Descriptive Statistics: Expenditure of only biomass and
multiple fuel users of sample households,2003------------------------ 116
Annex XI: - Location Map of Amhara National Regional State-------------------- 117
Annex XII: - Location Map of North Wollo Administrative Zone------------------ 118
Annex XIII: - Map of North Wollo Zone Forest Cover-------------------------------- 119
VIII
ACRONYMS
AED: - Alternative Energy Development
AFAP: - Amhara Forestry Action Program
ANRS: - Amhara National Regional State
ARCS: - Amhara Regional Conservation Strategy
ATAS: - Advanced Technology Assessment System
BLT: - Branch, Leafs and Trunk
BoPED: - Bureau of Planning and Economic Development
CO-SAERAR: - Commission for Sustainable Agriculture and Environment
Rehabilitation in Amhara Region
CSA: - Central Statistical Authority
DoPED: - Department of Planning and Economic Development
EEPCO: - Ethiopia Electric Power Corporation
EFAP: - Ethiopia Forestry Action Program
ESP: - Environment Support Program
GDP: - Gross Domestic Product
Kg: - Kilogram
Kgoe: - Kilogram of Oil Equivalent
Km: - Kilometer
KW: - Kilowatts
Ha: - Hectare
Hhs: - Households
NBE: - National Bank of Ethiopia
NUPI: - National Urban Planning Institutes
OECD: - Organization of European Community Development
Km: - Kilometer
LPG: - Liquid Petroleum Gas
Masl: - Meter Above Sea Level
MEDaC: - Ministry of Economic Development and Cooperation
MJ: - Mega Joules
MoA: - Ministry of Agriculture
MoME: - Ministry of Mines and Energy
MoNRDEP: - Ministry of Natural Resource Development and Environmental
Protection
MoRD: - Ministry of Rural Development
MW: - Megawatt
PH: - Private Households
PHA: - Public Housing Agency
TOE: - Tons of Oil Equivalent
UN: - United Nations
UNDP: - United Nations Development Program
WB: - World Bank
WBISPP: - Woody Biomass Inventory and Strategic Planning Project
WD: - World Development
WEC: - World Energy Conference
IX
GLOSSARY
Animate Energy (or power): -
Utilization of human and animal muscles to do work
Biomass fuel: -
Combustible or fermentable material of organic, non-fossil material of biological or
vegetable origin. For the purposes of this study it is confined to the most frequently
used traditional energy resources such as fuel wood, charcoal, animal dung and crop
residues etc bought or gathered and used by direct combustion. In this study it is
interchangeably used with traditional energy.
Commercial energy: -
Any energy form sold in the course or provided by a public utility. The term is
virtually synonymous with conventional and modern energy. Wood and other
traditional fuels are not included although they are widely traded.
Conventional energy: -
Energy sources, which have hitherto provided the bulk of the requirements for modern
industrial society. These include coal; petroleum and petroleum products and
electricity generated by petroleum products or from geothermal, hydro, or nuclear
power.
Demand side management: -
The planning, implementation and monitoring of activities designed to encourage
consumer to modify their pattern of energy use.
End use: -
The final use of energy at the level of the user, for example, lighting, cooking, space
heating and motive power.
Energy: -
Refers to available energy resources, renewable and non-renewable, that are used for
cooking, lighting, heating, cooling, baking and other such purposes as washing,
cleaning, hair drying, spraying at the household level. For the purpose of this study it
refers to energy sources used for baking and cooking for household purposes. The
scientific definition, which is the capacity (or ability) to do work.
Energy carrier: -
A liquid, gaseous, or solid fuel or electricity to provide energy.
Energy Efficiency: -
Conversion ratio of out put and input energy of production technologies and end-use
appliances.
Energy Equivalent: -
Theoretical value comparing energy contents of two different fuels, not including
differences in transformation efficiencies.
X
Energy Services: -
View of energy as a resource to perform a desired task to meet end-needs.
Final Energy: -
Energy, which the consumer buys or receives to perform a desired task with an end-
use device.
Fossil Fuels: -
The non-renewable energy resources of coal, petroleum or natural gas or any fuel
derived from them.
Households: -
A household is the group of people, whether blood relatives or not, who live in the
same house and eat from the same cooking pot.
Household energy consumption: -
The energy used for non-commercial domestic and closely related activities, such
consumption is neither for providing services nor for generating income. For the
purpose of this study, it refers to energy used for domestic cooking.
Non-commercial Energy: -
Energy, which doesn’t have a monetary price, usually refers to fuel wood, agricultural
residues or animal waste, which are self-collected or purchased from the market.
Non-renewable energy: -
Any form of primary energy, the supply of which is finite and hence its use depletes
the existing stock. It generally refers to fossil fuels.
Non-Woody biomass: -
Stalks, leaves, grass, animal and human waste
Primary Energy: -
An energy form in which there has been no chemical transformation before use.
Primary energy sources: -
Any natural energy source available in nature that can be transformed into a useful
energy form, such as coal, solar, biomass.
Recoverable reserves: -
Reserves of oil and gas recoverable from Known reserves, with existing technology,
under present economic conditions.
Reserves: -
The portion of a resource base that is proven to exist and can be economically
recovered, that is, the value of the product exceeds the production and transportation
costs.
Resources: -
The total existing stock of a resource, including discovered and not yet discovered
portions, regardless of the economic feasibility of recovering the resource.
XI
Traditional Energy: -
Forms of energy derived from locally available biomass, animate power and other
renewable energy sources using rudimentary production process and technologies.
They are largely synonymous with biomass fuels and the term is generally regarded as
excluding mineral fuels and hydropower. These energy forms are some times also
referred to as non-commercial energy, even though biomass fuels are become traded in
urban areas.
Useful energy: -
Energy, which is available to perform the task, required by the end- user, such as heat,
light or shaft power.
XII
ABSTRACT
This study was conducted in Woldia town of the North Wollo Zone in the Amhara National
Regional State. It deals with urban household energy consumption patterns for domestic
cooking. In this endeavor, a comparative analysis of the patterns and extent of utilization of
different traditional biomass energy sources and the conventional modern energy sources and
types was made. An analysis was also made to understand the major factors that contributed
to the persistent use of biomass fuels as the dominant energy source by households in small
rural towns like Woldia.
Several methods like household survey; focus group discussion and key informant interviews
were employed to collect data at household and individual levels. The methods involved
queries on several aspects of household energy consumption.
The findings of the study highlight the dominance of biomass fuel sources for domestic
cooking and its inefficient mode of utilization. The growing populations, static or even
decreasing overall family income coupled with a disproportionate rise in the total household
budget for fuel were observed to be the most important factors that exert a rising demand for
biomass fuel sources. The simultaneous interaction of these factors also entail that biomass
fuel consumption will continue dominating the household energy consumption for quite a long
time to come unless there is a switchover to alternative energy sources. An important factor,
which hinders the promotion of alternative energy sources, is however, the low-income level
of households, which prevent many households from using modern appliances and switching
to the use of higher-grade fuels. The types of food items households prepare and the method
of cooking that the households are used to also force them to opt for traditional fuels, as there
are no appropriate and affordable alternatives provided for these purposes.
The study also shows that in general households in Woldia depend on inefficient traditional
open fire stove, “Injera Mitad”. The effective functioning of the ‘Mirt Injera Mitad’ demands
proper kitchen place that many households in the study area do not have. Some families were
even found to be unable to afford for this facility. In general, the observed household level
challenges and the overall poor level of extension of alternative and efficient energy sources
and appliances for the urban households further explain the greater demand and preference
for fuel wood and other forms of biomass energy in the study area. The limitations observed
XIII
of the traditional and the modern energy sources call for appropriate measures that energy
sector policy and strategies should consider.
This study reconfirmed that biomass fuels are the staple source of household energy for the
majority of the population in small towns like Woldia. The study also noted that dependence
on diminishing fuel wood imposes a lot of hardships not only to the environment but also to
the overall household livelihood. Therefore, given the inaccessibility and un-affordability of
the modern energy sources for many poor urban dwellers, and the increasing environmental
pressure posed by high level of biomass energy consumption, this study suggests that
increasing end use efficiency should be given greater emphasis as an important prerequisite
and cost effective solution to tackle household level energy problem. To this effect
introduction of alternative fuel technologies to reduce demand for firewood and to improve
efficiency of energy use is vital.
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Introduction
Energy is an essential ingredient in the day-to-day life and activities of people. It is fair to say
that energy is vital for life and no energy would mean no life on earth. Plants and animals
need energy for their normal metabolic process. Human beings, however, use energy for
wider purposes, like; in production sector, construction, services, industries, transport and
communication, and power generation, as well as for consumption sectors like cooking,
heating, lighting, recreation and entertainment.
Given the paramount importance of energy for survival, growth and progress, there are a
number of critical issues of interest both for academic and policy purposes. In broad terms,
the major sources of energy and the demand and supply aspects of energy are among the
major issues of research interest. The nature and significance of any issue is bound to differ
under different socio-economic, technological and political settings. It is, therefore, vital to
start with the proper context of our interest- household energy for urban dwellers in small
towns.
In Ethiopia, several programs dealing with energy problems have been introduced and
implemented. There has also been an increased recognition of the accelerated depletion of
forest resources caused mainly by the higher rate of population growth and the associated
demand for fuel wood. However, government actions are rather slow to augment the
problem. It is only recently that the government has adopted policies that encourage the
substitution of conventional fuels for wood fuels in urban areas (UNDP/ESMAP, 1996:61).
This was a strategy in response to high deforestation rates that has been continuing in the
country. This strategy has brought about certain impact in the energy consumption of limited
2
number of urban households in the few major towns. The overall energy balance of the
household energy sub sector in both urban and rural areas is however, still dominated by
traditional fuels.
Empirical evidence indicates that the annual consumption of wood in Ethiopia is much more
than the sustainable yield. Various studies conducted in the energy sector since the early
1980s have consistently identified the household sector as the major consumer of energy,
which is almost entirely used for domestic purposes. Such heavy reliance on biomass fuels for
domestic cooking has thus resulted in profound environmental degradation in most parts of
the country. This situation is particularly severe in those parts of the country where droughts
and famine are recurrent and Woldia is one of those areas.
Woldia town, the study area for this research, depends primarily on biomass fuel for most of
its energy. According to the 1994 CSA Census results for the Amhara Region, out of the total
20,763 housing units in towns of North Wollo Zone, about 85.8 per cent of the housing units
exclusively depended on biomass fuel sources for their cooking (1995:124/5). Identical
pattern was observed in the general situation in Woldia town, where out of the total 5413
housing units only 3.27 per cent used electricity for their cooking. This supports the argument
that despite the improved availability of hydroelectric power, households are not switching to
electricity. This study was initiated to enquire why that is really happening and to identify the
determining factors in such decisions. More specifically the study is designed to undertake an
analysis of the factors and causes for the overwhelming dependence of households on biomass
fuel in Woldia town. The study also looked at the household energy consumption patterns,
and the major factors that inhibit households from switching to commercial energy sector.
3
1.2. Statement of the Problem
Wood, leaves, twigs and other forest products like charcoal and other biomass fuel resources
such as crop residues and dried cow dung cakes are critically in short supply in Ethiopia and
are in a state of declining productivity. Pressure on the physical environment in certain areas
is so high that it has reached a point where it can no more support life that depends on it.
Forest and wood resource areas are severely depleted and have become less accessible both
physically and economically, especially to the poor. Distance from settlement areas for
gathering fuel wood have been increasing and access is becoming more difficult.
The increases in population size leads in general to a corresponding increase in the overall
energy intake of the people. On the contrary, the available sources of energy are limited in
quantity to support the ever-increasing demand. As mentioned above, the type of energy used
by the majority of households i.e. the biomass energy and the declining state of the energy
resources in the environment, are highly and directly interlinked to each other, one affecting
the other. Biomass energy, in particular fuel wood and charcoal, remain the dominant energy
sources for most rural and urban households, and the consumption of commercial energy
sources is relatively low. The overwhelming dependence on biomass energy for household
cooking in particular is commonly considered as the main causes for the rapid deforestation
and depletion of vegetation in severely eroded environments, especially in the northern parts
of the country.
The dominance of subsistence agricultural sector in the national economy and the recurrent
natural hazards (which are partially explained by environmental degradation) adversely affect
the environment by forcing farmers to overexploit the natural resource base. The problem of
energy in the household sector is not only the heavy reliance on biomass fuel, but also in the
inefficient utilization of energy. Experience in Woldia town and its surrounding areas shows
4
that such a heavy reliance on a limited resource base and inefficient mode of utilization of
these traditional fuels are the characteristics of household energy consumption.
In many parts of the country the ever-increasing resource depletion has long been a threat for
fuel wood shortages. As a result the demand for biomass energy surpassed the overall supply.
The supply side is increasingly diminishing and it is getting worse in recent times. The
decline in the supply is substantially reflected in the ever-increasing price of biomass fuels,
which adds additional pressure on the already low and overstretched income of the poor.
Projected fuel wood demand indicated that the country’s annual sustainable fuel wood supply
is far below its demand. For example, the estimated demand of fuel wood for the year 2002
was projected to be 62.3 million m3 against a mere 10.9million m
3 fuel wood supply (EFAP,
1993; Cited in Shibru, 1996:55).
Since the 1980s the Ethiopian Government has been taking a number of measures to
encourage urban households to switch to kerosene, LPG and electricity through subsidies or
prices set substantially below their economic cost. However, in some urban areas where these
conventional modern energy sources are wholly or partially available, still a significant
number of households continue to depend on the traditional energy sources. There are no
recorded evidences, whether the various measures taken by governmental and non-
governmental institutions against environmental degradation through afforestation
programmes has brought any positive and significant effect on household energy supply and
consumption patterns. The issue continues to deserve much attention and worthwhile
investigation for a better understanding of the dynamics of household energy and to establish
facts on existing energy consumption patterns. This research was intended to investigate the
factors behind the continued dependence of households on biomass energy sources. The
consumption patterns of biomass fuel energy against the modern energy sources was assessed
5
and an analysis was made to understand the reasons for biomass fuel to persist as the
dominant energy sources at the household level in the study area.
1.3. Research Objective
� The study was intended to assess household energy consumption patterns for
cooking with particular reference to biomass fuel energy in Woldia town. To
this effect, the study was designed:
� To make a comparative assessment of the patterns and extent of
different types of traditional energy sources as well as the modern
energy sources for domestic cooking,
� To explain factors that determine the patterns and amount of energy use
for various types of energy
� To assess the use of improved traditional fuel saving appliances for
household cooking,
� To examine the extent of commercialization of traditional fuels,
� To show the extent of energy budget share in the household
expenditure balance.
1.4. Significance of the Study
Household energy is a key issue recognized in the national economy of Ethiopia in general,
and the energy sector in particular. Studies show that the household sub-sector is the major
consumer of energy, and almost the entire energy demand of this sub-sector is met from
biomass resources (Getachew, 2002:105). Biomass energy resources are critically in short
supplies in the study area (as has been observed in the country as a whole) and show a
declining trend in productivity. The highly degraded environmental conditions coupled with
the recurring drought and famine incidences in the study area forced farmers to act against the
ethics of environmental management. Farmers and resource poor people over-exploit the
natural environment base in their attempt to earn income by exporting biomass resource to the
6
towns for construction and for household energy needs. This practice has aggravated the
extent of damage to the resource base, which resulted in the decline of the supply to meet the
sustained demand. However, the immediate victim of this consequence is the poor household,
which almost entirely depends on biomass resources for the required energy demand.
The continuing trend of high demand for biomass resources for household energy coupled
with inefficient utilization of available energy resources is believed to have been substantially
responsible and important driving factors for the increased rate of depletion of forest and
wood resources in the study area. As the economic costs of energy substitutes of the modern
sector both at the macro and household level are perceived and experienced to be high, the
overwhelmingly high dependence on the biomass energy does not seem to decline. There are
no remarkable efforts made to reduce the current level of dependence on biomass energy
sources and to facilitate the shift towards modern sector energy sources.
Since the 1980s, the supply side intervention to mitigate the energy crisis at the macro and
household level was considered as an important solution to the problem. This supply side
intervention through the supply of subsidized kerosene and electricity has been the traditional
focus of many countries including Ethiopia. However, this researcher observed that the trend
and the level of achievement are so far highly disappointing. Recently, demand side
interventions from the context of consumers’ decision have become the orientation. Most
studies conducted so far in this regard were very general, conducted at the national level and
mostly focused around the major towns or city and metropolitan levels, their findings do not
in general seem to apply for small and rural market towns like Woldia, particularly situated in
a drought-prone and environmentally degraded part of the country. Those results may not
7
sufficiently reflect the energy consumption patterns in the typical small to medium sized
towns that are largely dispersed all over the country.
Therefore, detailed and area-specific study is called for understanding biomass fuel use
patterns as well as the factors that influence the consumers’ decision-making process
regarding energy supply and use. The study attempted to provide realistic primary level
survey-based information on why biomass fuels continue to persist as a dominant source of
household energy. The study is believed to provide some important bases to improving the
household level energy-package. It could also serve as a reference for integrating energy
issues with other development endeavors, such as tangible recovery of degraded
environments; reafforestation and regeneration efforts; improving land fertility and
productivity; improving the human capital; cogent and effective population programs; and
development of infrastructures. It is generally observed that only a thriving rural hinterland or
service area can lead to improving the productivity and for effective services delivery of the
towns, and vice versa. Mutual exchange in the rural areas and the serving local towns can
mutually reinforce the condition and the energy sector forms an important segment of this
improving condition.
1.5. Research Questions
The following are the research questions to be addressed by the study.
1. To what extent traditional biomass energy persists in Woldia town as the dominant
source of energy and how far the promotion of conventional modern energy sources
fulfills their intended objectives for household cooking?
2. To what extent commercialization of biomass fuels prevail in Woldia town?
3. Who incur the highest proportion of budget share for household cooking? The lower or
the higher income households?
8
4. Which factors determine the patterns, amount and expenditure of the total household
income for energy for household cooking in Woldia?
5. How far improved traditional fuel saving appliances are adopted in the town?
6. What are the major problems and constraints to address household energy demand in
Woldia?
7. What measures are required to improve household energy problems in Woldia?
1.6. Factors Considered
Energy consumption pattern within a certain community is the process resulting from the
simultaneous interaction of factors that force the decision-making behavior of the household.
The research considered the amount of energy used, energy expenditure budget made by
households for domestic cooking and access to modern energy sources as important variables.
For the purpose of the study the amount of energy used for household cooking is defined as
energy sources used for household cooking purpose as weighted in the same energy units of
mega-joule. The type of variables considered are the aggregate sum of all energy sources, the
sum total of all biomass fuel sources and modern energy sources as represented by kerosene.
The second variable which is expenditure made by the household defined as monthly
expenditure made by the household for the aggregate sum of all energy sources, the sum total
of expenditure made for all biomass fuel sources and expenditure made for modern fuel as
represented by kerosene.
The third variable, which is access to modern energy source, defined as the acquisition of
privately owned electric meter by households under study.
9
There are several factors that influence the decision-making and behavioral trend of energy
consumption patterns by households. For the purpose of this study the author considered
factors such as household size, income of the household, headship patterns of the household
head, house tenure status of the household and availability of proper kitchen place as
determinants influencing households decisions on the amount of fuel used, expenditure made
for fuel sources and households direct access to the main interconnected power grid.
The analysis of the relationships and the level of influence to one another between the
different variables are presented in various subsections of the document, as appropriate.
The major propositions for this study can be broadly presented as follows:
i) Factors such as household size, household income, house tenure status and
availability of proper kitchen place influence the amount of energy consumed and
the level of expenditure by households for fuel sources for domestic cooking.
ii) Household headship pattern, household income and house tenure status of the
household influence households’ decision to acquire privately owned electric
meter.
1.7. Methods of Data Collection and Analysis
1.7.1. Selection of the Study Town
Among the twelve urban centers of North Wollo Zone, those towns found along the main
Addis Ababa-Mekele truck road have better access to the conventional modern energy
sources. These towns cover the lower plain of the eastern escarpment of North Wollo zone
and part of the Great Rift Valley. The hinterlands of these towns are among the severely
degraded and resource-depleted areas of the country. The natural resource, especially that of
biomass, is severely degraded and the sustainable supply of the resource has reached to the
10
point of negative balance in terms of the current demand. People and suppliers now suffer
from long distance journey to fetch fuel wood and high price increment to acquire biomass
fuel sources for their daily cooking with in the households. This condition seems to persist
even in the future until notable recovery of soil, land and vegetation is allowed to occur, or
people in general switch over more steadily to conventional energy sources like kerosene and
electricity.
Thus, owing to the continuous depletion of the biomass resource base of the area, and due to
the imbalance between the sustainable supply and demands for biomass resources and as a
result of the ever-increasing prices of traditional energy sources, the issue seems pertinent to
initiate a closer and micro level enquiry to understand why people persist to depend on
biomass fuel sources and what measures are required to mitigate the problem. Therefore, the
following lists of factors were considered as important and justifiable criteria for the selection
of Woldia town for this study.
1. It is a potential market for biomass fuel supplies from its hinterland and offers as such
a very typical example for the study of biomass consumption.
2. It is conveniently located to access direct electric power grid connection from a sub-
station facility providing electricity to the town consumers,
3. The town can represent most of the identical size towns existing in the country,
4. The town and its hinterland typically represent most drought-affected and
environmentally degraded areas in the country and,
5. The previous knowledge of the researcher for the town.
1.7.2. Sampling Method
The survey employed representative sampling methods. The target population for the study
was the entire households of eight Kebeles in the town. The selection of sample households
11
for the study was done using simple random-sampling method by also considering important
factors such as cost effectiveness, reliability, and representativeness of the information.
Considering the need for data of high quality, the capability to effectively manage and control
the survey operation as well as the resource available for the survey, it was decided to sample
120 households from the total 5817 urban households in the town. The sampling population
was randomly drawn from 5817 dispersedly settled households within the eight Kebeles of the
town. Prior to the selection of sample households, list of households was prepared by the
hired data collectors with full consultation of the respective Kebele administration by using a
master list form developed for the purpose.
1.7.3. Methods of Data Collection
Both quantitative and qualitative data from primary and secondary sources have been
gathered and analyzed. A combination of the following data collection methods was
employed for the study.
1.7.3.1. Household Sample Survey
Conventional household survey was adopted for the study as the main method designed to
gather quantitative information from sample households. Three enumerators were assigned to
conduct the household survey using the structured questioner.
1.7.3.2. Focus Group Discussion
Focus group discussions with senior, knowledgeable and well-experienced residents of
Woldia were one of the qualitative data collection methods employed for the study. The
12
discussion was undertaken with two groups that comprised both adult and elderly men and
women, with in the range of 6 to 10 individuals for each focus group.
1.7.3.3. Key Informant Interview
Individuals who were considered knowledgeable and rich in experiences about household
energy and socioeconomic condition of the residents in Woldia were identified and
interviewed. The key informants interviewed included professionals from different
governmental and non-governmental organization, improved traditional Mitad producers, and
Zonal and Municipal officials’. In addition to the formal interviews, personal experiences and
observations of the researcher facilitated the understanding of the overall conditions related to
domestic energy use and related significant factors and constraints in the area.
1.7.3.4. Secondary Data Collection
By reviewing relevant books and journals, published and unpublished documents the
researcher collected secondary data and used the information primarily to set the research
context and also to relate the research findings with other empirical studies on the subject of
the study.
1.7.4. Methods of Data Analysis
The data collected through various methods are presented and analyzed using appropriate
descriptive and quantitative methods, such as mean, range, percentage, proportion and graphs.
In addition to the quantitative data, the household survey data was inputted, processed and
analyzed by using the appropriate SPSS software. Relevant statistical methods mainly
bivariate correlation and chi-square test of significance were employed to validate the
13
relationship or association between the dependent and explanatory or the independent
variables.
1.8. Limitations of the Study
The following are the limitations of the study
• Time and financial resource limitations were the major shortcomings faced while
conducting the research.
• Recent attempts of restructuring the governmental organizations of the Amhara
National Regional State caused disorganization of information, which were held at
Woreda and zonal level because they were consequently scattered into different sector
bureaus. Moreover, due to the ongoing process of restructuring during periods of data
collection resulting to the non-availability of knowledgeable experts in different
sectors coupled with poor documentation were major limitations that impeded
obtaining further information about previous surveys made on biomass fuel and
related matters.
1.9. Organization of the Paper
The paper contains five chapters. Chapter one presents the introduction that includes general
background, statement of the problem, and significance of the study, research objectives and
research questions, and methodology and design of the study. The second chapter contains
review of related literature. Chapter three presents general background of the study area.
Chapter four is devoted to analysis and discussion. Chapter five is the last chapter that
contains summary, conclusion and recommendation.
14
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Overview of Energy Resource and Consumption
Man’s survival has always depended upon his ability to derive adequate energy through the
discovery of sources of energy to supplement the energy of his muscles. In fact, only man has
been able to effectively alter his environment to suit for himself through use of energy sources
(Lofteness, 1978:3). The type of energy we use and the type of fuel technology we apply can
have a major impact on facilitating sustainable livelihood, improving health and education
and significantly reducing poverty. Access to adequate levels of energy service is a crucial
prerequisite for the development of any country (Karekezi, et.al, 1997:13). It is evidenced
that, each major economic and social change in the world has been accompanied by the
discovery, the availability or the technology of exploitation and social demand of new energy
sources and considerable increase in the rate of energy consumption.
Since the discovery of fire, energy has been a major factor in development (Colombo, 1996:
53). The first discovery and use of fire to scare away fierce animals, clear forest for use of
land, cook food and keep from unfavorable cold weather condition began the long history of
man’s use of energy. It enabled him to increase his food supply, improve his physical
comfort, and expand the quality of his life (Lofteness, 1978:3). Exploitation of animal power
about 5000BC was an essential component of the advent of agriculture and the ensuing of
stable settlements, with all its social and cultural consequences (Colombo, 1996:53). During
Renaissance the use of wind in sea transport and for churning mills had a profound influence
and contribution to the expansion of culture and commerce. The windmill, which first
appeared in Europe in the 12th
century, was used primarily for pumping of water and the
grinding of grain (Lofteness, 1978:5).
15
The major industrial development in Europe came after the invention of the steam engine that
freed industry from the geographical limitations imposed by power resources and permitted
location of industry either near the other primary resources or near convenient transportation
(Lofteness, 1978:5). At the beginning of the 19th
century, the European industrial revolution
was made possible by the use of hydropower and coal as an energy source (Farinelli, 1997: 9).
The use of water as the source of energy to turn water wheels for the grinding of grain dates
back in Roman times (Lofteness, 1978:102). The conversion of hydraulic energy to
mechanical energy for the operation of factories reached its peak during the 17th
century, at
which time the steam engine came into use and permitted the location of factories elsewhere
than on river banks. Hydraulic resources became important once again with the development
of efficient electric generators and transmission technology that permitted location of
hydroelectric plants several hundred miles from the points of energy consumption (Lofteness,
1978:102). Electricity stimulated new forms of industry and changed the urban environment,
while, especially after World War II the availability of an abundant, flexible, easy to transport
and cheap energy sources, oil and natural gas, has fueled the great transformation of industrial
society (Farinelli, 1997: 9).
Prior to the 17th
century, the productivity of man was mainly determined by his own labor and
that of domesticated animals (Lofteness, 1978:6). Since the first use of inanimate energy that
provides man with a cost far below than that of animate energy sources, there has been,
undoubtedly, some correlation between the use of energy and economic productivity
(Lofteness, 1978:6). It is now more generally appreciated that inequalities in people’s access
to resources and the resultant ways in which they use them constitute greater challenge for
sustainable development (Elliott, 1999: 39). There is tremendous diversity in terms of
peoples’ access to resources of all kinds. The case of energy use illustrates how inequalities in
16
access to resources could be considered at a number of levels. The decline in the traditional
use of biomass and the increased in modern energy use is viewed as an indication of socio-
economic development (Zandbergen and Moreira, 1993; Cited in Karekezi, 1997:13).
Out of the total primary energy demand in industrializing counties in 1980, 98 per cent supply
was met from the modern energy sector and only the remaining 2 per cent from biomass,
while the same pattern was 48 and 52 per cent respectively in the developing countries.
Moreover, even within developing countries, there are extremes in which biomass serves as
the major or exclusive energy source (Miller, 1986:6). On the other hand the per capita
consumption of modern energy in the developing world is extremely low, relative to that in
the industrial countries. For example, in the early 1990s per capita consumption of modern
energy in the US was 8 tons of oil equivalent energy per year, which is 80 times more than
that of Africa, 40 times more than of South Asia, 15 times more than that of East Asia and 8
times more than that of Latin America (WB, 1996: 16).
As countries grow richer, their patterns of energy consumption tends to change, and the
household energy consumption share diminishes while industrial consumption grows. In the
OECD countries, the two largest sectors of energy use are industry and “others” (mainly
residential), accounting for about 40 and 30 per cent respectively. Transportation comes next
with about 20 per cent. In the poorest countries, the consumption for household purposes is
dominant (Dunkerely, 1981: 38). This difference in the patterns of energy use reflects, on one-
hand, the inefficiency in the traditional use of biomass fuel and, on the other hand the much
greater importance of the household sector, especially the dominance of the rural economy in
the developing countries (Dunkerely, 1981: 39).
17
What matters to energy consumers is not the gross amount of energy used, but the energy
services received (or “useful” energy). Traditional fuels are typically used in ways that yield
very low efficiencies, thus countries using primarily modern fuels yield higher efficiencies
and receive more energy services for a given energy input than those, which depend largely
on low efficiency traditional fuels (Dunkerely, 1981: 36). As a result, the industrial countries
receive more energy services for a given input than those of the developing countries, which
depend largely on traditional source of energy.
Though, it is used traditionally with low efficiency, biomass has numerous economic and
environmental advantages, for the global as well as for local energy balances. Biomass fuels
make no net concentration to atmospheric carbon dioxide if produced and used sustainably to
allow re-growth of biomass (HABITAT, 1993:7). Globally biomass accounts for about 14 per
cent of the world’s energy supply and is the most important source of energy for three quarter
of the world’s population in developing countries (HABITAT, 1993:4). Developing nations
obtain more than 40 per cent of there energy from biomass, more than half of this from wood
fuel and even in some countries dependence on biomass fuel reaches up to 90 per cent
(Miller, 1986: 5).
A number of developed countries also use biomass quite substantially. For example, the
United States of America uses it nearly in equivalent amount to its nuclear power, deriving 4
per cent of the total energy from biomass. Sweden also gets 14 per cent and Austria 10 per
cent energy from biomass (HABITAT, 1993:6).
The African continent is well endowed with diverse non-renewable and renewable energy
resources. Despite its energy resource potential, however, Africa has, due to lack of investable
capital, favorable political and economic environment, and due to lack of efficient modern
18
technologies, these resources are not fully exploited (Farinelli, 1997: 23). Both the total and
specifically modern energy use in Africa is the lowest in the world. Existing estimates of
energy use in Africa indicates a significant and persistent dependence on traditional biomass
energy and limited use of modern energy sources (Karekezi, 1997:1). The average per capita
final modern energy consumption in Africa is less than 300 kg of petroleum equivalent,
compared with 7905 kg in North America and the world average of 1434 kg (World Bank
Index, 1996; Cited in Sokona, 1997:15).
In Sub-Saharan Africa traditional biomass, mainly fuel wood and charcoal, is by far the most
significant fuel. With the exception of South Africa it accounts for over 70 per cent of total
primary energy consumption throughout the continent, and even in some countries, such as
Burundi, Burkina Faso and Ethiopia it reaches as high as 90 per cent (Farinelli, 1997:23).
In Africa the prospects of a major increase in modern energy supply are constrained by the
unequal distribution of resources, which tend to be concentrated in a few countries. This
spatial concentration entails large investments in distribution. On the contrary, renewable
sources of energy including biomass resources are better distributed throughout the region
(Karekezi, 1997:1). On aggregate, the biomass resource base in Sub-Saharan Africa is more
than sufficient to cover the annual per capita demand for fuel. The potential of natural forest
resources covers 22.2 per cent of the total land area and biomass resources are estimated at
about 82 billion tonnes, which have the potential of 168.2 tonnes per capita (Sokona, 1997:3).
However, these aggregates conceal the considerable differences in terms of spatial resource
distribution that exist within the African countries. According to FAO (1985), in 1980, 13
countries in Africa were in states of acute fuel wood scarcity, where their available supplies of
fuel wood were insufficient to meet the minimum requirement. And only 6 countries were
with surplus potential for wood based energy (Miller, 1986:8). Despite the regional scarcity,
19
biomass remains the major sources of energy; it contributes for over two-thirds of the total
annual energy use in most African countries (Hailelul, 2000: 30). Figure 2.1 indicates the total
primary energy demand in 1990 for Sub-Saharan Africa entailing the dominance of biomass
fuel for the overall energy demand.
Figure 2.1.:- Total Primary Energy Demand in 1990 for
Sub Saharan Africa
Biomass
54%Oil
27%
Hydro
3%
Solid Fuels
14%
Gas
2%
Source: - World Energy Council, 1992(Cited in Karekezi, 1997:15)
2.2. Biomass For Energy
The availability of energy and the security of its supply are of paramount importance to all
human communities. During the 1970’s and 1980’s the notion of an “energy problem” had
been closely tied to the price and availability of oil (Hall, 1987: 3). When oil prices shot up,
first in 1973 and again in 1979, there was a widespread recognition of an “energy crisis”.
The global energy situation is in fact far more complex and more serious than annual changes
in oil prices increment (Miller, 1986:5). Increased consumption of non-renewable forms of
energy, particularly fossil fuels, not only has adverse effects on the environment, but also for
most consumers oil is more expensive, especially for countries which depend heavily on
imported oil. Oil imports in such countries makes larger share of total imports, placing heavy
strains on balances of payments (Dunkerely, 1981:4; Karekezi, 1997:18). Besides
constraining development, the high demand for imported oil and the constraint to fulfill the
20
demand explains unprecedented demands for fuel wood and other forms of biomass energy in
the developing world (Miller, 1986:12).
Increasing population in the developing world coupled with difficulties in obtaining fossil
fuels means that there are now more people dependent on traditional biomass fuel than ever
before (Hall, 1987: 4). Biomass energy sources like fuel wood, crop residue; dung and
charcoal are the major and exclusive energy sources for the great majority of the world
people, most evidently in the developing world. Increasing interest in biomass for energy
since the early 1990s is well illustrated by the large number of energy scenarios showing
biomass resources as the potentially world’s major and most sustainable energy source of the
future at both small and large scale levels and can lay claim to being considered as a
renewable equivalent to fossil fuels (Araya, 2002:35). It offers considerable flexibility of fuel
supply due to the range, diversity and availability of fuel that can be produced (HABITAT,
1993:6).
Biomass has numerous environmental advantages, both globally and locally. Biomass energy
systems can increase the energy available for economic development without contributing to
the greenhouse effect since biomass is not a net emitter of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere
when it is produced and used sustainably to allow re-growth of its sources (Araya, 2002:35).
Unlike the combustion of fossil fuel oil, coal and natural gas, the impacts of biomass fuel tend
to be on small-scale and localized compared with the larger, more widely distributed impacts
of use of fossil fuels. Therefore, the impacts of the use of biomass are more controllable, more
reversible and, consequently, more benign (HABITAT, 1993:7). Since they are indigenous
sources, they have the potential to supply energy services where the demand is created
(Konemund, 2002:139). This could bring very significant social and economic benefits to
both rural and urban areas. In the context of sustainability, traditional biomass fuels not only
21
provide cheap energy to the individual consumer, but also have positive effects on the
national economy. Biomass fuel use creates income and employment opportunities for those
involved in fuel collection and marketing and allows major foreign exchange saving that
otherwise would be required for the provision through imports of alternative energy supplies
(Konemund, 2002:138).
With increasing population and per capita demand, and depletion of fossil-fuel energy
resources, the demand for biomass energy is expected to increase rapidly in developing
countries, and this sector is likely to remain an important global energy source in the future
(Karekezi, 1997:18). Biomass use relates to a range of technological options. It can be burned
directly or converted to a liquid or gaseous fuel. Experimentally, biomass systems can meet
both the need for high quality “carriers” for industry and the need for fuel for domestic and
community needs (Miller, 1986:18). In recent years, a number of technological options hold
promise to transform biomass into various kinds of fuels, and to make their use more efficient
(Miller, 1986:30). However, the state of development of conversion technology has caused
considerable problems in sustaining biomass energy programs (Hall, 1987: 451).
Despite a growing interest in biomass, as a result of difficult availability and high prices of
fossil fuels, and environmental concerns, and technological advances, its inefficient use in
developing countries has been linked to a number of economic, social and environmental
problems. Biomass fuels in the developing countries are typically used in households in ways
that yield very low efficiencies. Thus fuel wood is mainly used for cooking over very
inefficient open fires or ovens, in which only 10 to 15 per cent of the gross input is received in
form of useful energy (Dunkerely, 1981: 36).
22
The potential for biomass conversion technology for fuel is great, however, and may be the
only long-term method to meet our energy requirements (UN, 1991:5). In general,
development and use of most renewable energies for use in countries like Ethiopia is still
associated with a number of problems, such as high development cost, imported technology,
low utilization efficiencies, large capital requirement and undeveloped market (UN, 1991:3;
Mulugeta, 2002:151)
Which biomass conversion opportunities hold the most promise in a particular setting depends
on local needs, available resources, and environmental and social issues. Still, certain
techniques and technologies can be singled out as especially effective and versatile
(Miller, 1986:21). For example, though, biogasification has important environmental and
public health benefits, the unavailability of feed stock, unmet managerial needs, climatic
requirements, and in some areas cultural taboos against handling waste, etc. limit its potential
(Miller, 1986:21). Under the current limitations in the traditional and modern energy sectors,
the improvements of energy efficiency in different sectors, in particular increasing end-use
efficiency at the household level received major attention by the energy planners and
government institutions (Konemund, 2002:139). Konemund further notes that fuel saving
stoves could be produced at low cost and provide a cost-effective solution, environmental
protection and improved livelihoods. In addition, they can also have significant economic
effects on both at the household level and at the macro economic level at large (2002:141).
2.3. Household Energy and Inter Fuel Substitution
The rapid rate of urbanization is one of the important socio-demographic phenomena that
have accompanied recent economic growth in almost all regions of the world (Bereket,
2000:1). While this day the developed world is more urbanized, developing countries have
23
much faster urban population growth. On average between 1980 and 1990 the annual urban
population percentage growth rate in the developing world was 3.6, and with this growth rate,
the share of the developing world’s population living in urban areas is expected to raise from
30 per cent in 1985, to 57 per cent in 2025(Leitmann, 1991:3). The higher level of
urbanization has brought changes in the structure of spatial movement of people, settlement
patterns, the economy, forms of employment, concentration of services and other sectors of
the natural economies and societies, and policies. Above all these changes fuel demand for
energy in all sectors of the urban economy, among other things, particularly that for modern
energy (Leitmann, 1991:3; Bereket, 2000:2).
Studies of energy problems in developing countries have shown that energy is largely used for
subsistence, hence the household sub-sector accounts for a high proportion of gross national
energy consumption (Hosier, 1993; Cited in Moyu, 1999:109). The energy consumption
pattern for households shows considerable differences in the form of energy being used and
differences in mode of energy acquisition between urban and rural and among towns of
different sizes. In urban areas there is a greater division of labour, which has brought a
distinction between producers and consumers of energy. In the urban areas fuels are traded
commodities, whether they be wood, charcoal, fossil fuel or electricity (Leitmann, 1991:3).
In the urban context, the demands for energy are diverse. Due to the concentration of
economic activities and infrastructure in towns, total per capita urban energy consumption is
higher than the rural areas and non-household sectors share the significant amount of energy
consumption (Leitmann, 1991:2). The diversified demand for energy in the urban areas
coupled with the monetization of energy services means that the households, especially, the
poor ones, compete for energy with the affluent and productive sector of the economy. The
competition for energy in towns leads some households to spend a relatively high proportion
24
of their income on meeting their basic energy needs. In Tanzania, for example, it was found
out that the lowest income households spent as much as 30 per cent of the median
households` income on energy (Hosier.R, 1993;Cited in Moyu, 1999:109). Also, the study
that was made earlier in Zambia, shows that low-income urban households spent up to 19 per
cent of their income on charcoal alone (Ouerghi A, 1990; Cited in Moyu, 1999:109).
Like elsewhere in most developing countries, the energy consumption of the households in
Africa has preponderance over the total demand of all other sectors put together and relies
overwhelmingly on traditional fuels. Despite its dominance, biomass fuel is not the only fuel
used in the urban households of developing countries. A number of factors influence as what
sort of energy is used by which household, the most significant of them is the socioeconomic
status. Households with higher socio-economic status as in terms of income and level of
education are expected to consume more energy, a decrease in the importance of biomass
fuels and an increase in modern forms of energy (Bereket, 2000:3).
The dominant model of developed countries on energy transitions states that, as families gain
socioeconomic status, they abandon technologies that are inefficient, less costly, and more
polluting, “lower” order sources on the energy ladder, like dung, fuel wood and charcoal,
where they move on to the purchase of technologies such as stoves and fuels, “higher” on the
ladder (WD, 2000:2084).
In developing countries, such transitions may not necessarily relate to income elasticity
(Moyu, 1999: 66). Rarely is this transition complete since higher income households continue
to use traditional fuels also in combination with modern ones. Even households with higher
incomes continue to consume some biomass fuels. This is partly because some traditional
fuels are needed for specified type of cooking (Bereket, 2000:5). The study made on
25
Jaracuaro and other Mexican Villages, calls the traditional energy ladder model into question
(WD, 2000:2089). It finds that, in addition to the socioeconomic status of the given
households, there are also a number of other factors that influence a household’s switch over
from one fuel to another without abandonment of those traditionally used. In addition to
income of households, the availability of wood, access to modern fuels, and relative prices are
also important in the energy transition (Barnes and Qian, 1992; Cited in Bereket, 2000:3).
Hence, families may add fuels and stove types, but seldom leave any fuel or stove type behind
completely. Instead households tend to use more biomass and modern fuel when their income
increases, which is not a neat transition as predicted by the “energy ladder” hypothesis. The
first factor is security that guarantees the household to rely on a constant supply of the fuel.
The supply network of modern forms of energy must be fully certain and guaranteed for
households to depend only on them (Bereket, 2000:3). According to the literature the route
and frequency of fuel delivery, the tendency of the stove type to malfunction, and the
household member’s ability to repair the stove when a problem arises affect security. The
second factor is the culture indigenous to the household fuel preferences by cooking practices
(WD, 2000: 2019).
Thus, the traditional energy ladder is likely to provide only a limited view of reality in actual
household’s use of energy type in the developing world. The assumption of complete
transition from one type of energy to the other by abandoning others may not completely
apply to developing economies, particularly in Africa (Moyu, 1999: 66). It is more elaborated
from the Mexican village experience and from the failures of linear energy ladder. Multiple
cooking fuel use patterns have been reported frequently in the literature on households energy
use since the eighties (WD, 2000: 2094). The economic implication of this pattern of mixed
switching is that multiple fuel users tend to spend more on purchasing household cooking
fuels than only single fuel users (WD, 2000:2092). Households also tend to diversify their
26
fuel use to better cope with the variety of methods needed for food preparation or as a form of
“back-up” against policies that can modify the relative prices of fuel (Tinker, 1980;Cited in
WD, 2000: 2094). It is also true in the case of Ethiopia, where the escalation of electricity
prices led to the extensive downward shift to biomass fuels for baking. Thus, it is further
indicated that the extent and permanence of multiple fuel use patterns in households are the
result of complex interactions between economic factor such as highly variable fuel prices and
unreliability of fuel supply; social factors such as household’s evolution and security of
monetary incomes, and cultural factors like specific cooking practices, habits and religious
beliefs (WD, 2000: 2094). Therefore, energy consumption pattern within a certain community
is a process resulting from the simultaneous interaction of factors that force the decision
behavior of the household. These include more convenience, cleanness, status, food flavor,
and inadequacies of modern devices to fulfill traditional cooking practices, and demand for
new skills.
2.4. Biomass Fuel and Environment
Energy use by humans for life support is one of the principal sources, which necessarily
interferes with natural environment in various ways and to varying degrees in space and time.
Food, fibers, water, shelter and energy are basic needs for which human being depends on
environment. Developing countries have a more intense and immediate dependence on their
natural resources than developed countries. People in this part of the world have crude, low
technologies in extracting these resources and have not yet developed efficient industrial
capacities to convert the resources into more efficient and productive channels. However,
what matters is not the use of its natural resources, but it is the unbalanced and excessive use
of the resource base with very low efficiency in extraction as well as use or intake of energy
from each unit. All these low technologies lead to resource extraction beyond regenerative
27
capacity, which is becoming critical in most developing countries, where vast majority of
population is directly dependent upon natural environment.
Developing countries direct dependence on forest and wood resources for their energy
demand is the most frequently and widely cited case considered to be the manifestation of
poverty-caused households to depend on biomass resources for their daily energy demand.
Renewable natural resources, such as biomass, on which most people in the developing world
directly depend for their livelihood, have their own resilience limits beyond which their
regenerative capacity is disturbed. These resources have their cyclic capacity to fully recover
into their full and normal status in the given time-period if they remain undisturbed in their
ecology.
The extent to which human beings depend on biomass resources has consequences on the
duration of recovery they need to fully replace themselves for extraction and use. The
recovery rate of biomass resources depends on seasonal or daily cycles of solar flux, water
and other climatic factors, edaphic conditions, cycles of plant growth, nature of plants or
trees, and mostly as it happens today it is also highly affected by intensive exploitation (WEC,
1986:294). According to the World Bank report, globally there are nearly two billion people
without access to modern forms of energy, the overwhelming majority of which are from
developing countries (1996:20). Especially in this part of the world, approximately one-third
of all energy consumption is obtained from the burning of wood, crop residues, and animal
dung (W.B, 1996:8). It is further evidenced that the consumption of traditional fuel even in
towns and cities of the developing world is tremendous. This is especially true in several non-
oil producing Sub-Saharan African countries where the availability of modern and the costs of
distribution of acquiring related appliances often inhibit the use of modern energy sources
(1996:8).
28
The high incidence of mass poverty means that modern and efficient energy sources and
associated appliances even if available in the market, are not affordable for most poor peoples
in the developing world (Mekonnen, 2002:166), and this makes an unique case in the energy
sphere, eg over consumption of low-graded traditional energy, and under-consumption of high
quality modern fuels on the other. In fact, traditional fuels account for over 60 per cent of the
total energy used throughout Sub-Saharan Africa, and wood alone provides over 90 per cent
of the total national energy consumption in some countries like Ethiopia (Misana, 1999:14).
Although biomass has important benefit in the overall energy balances, its inefficient use in
developing countries has been linked to a number of adverse environmental effects like
excessive deforestation at local, regional and national scales, indoor air pollution and decline
in crop yields (Getachew, 2002:106). Thus, the high and direct dependence on biomass fuel
coupled with low efficiencies in its end use at household level, mainly for cooking on open
fire, are contributing to unnecessary high level of biomass resource extraction and
consumption (Konemund, 2002:138).
Such heavy dependence on the forest resource is a threat for the environment. This pressure
has led to the enormous depletion of forest resources resulting in serious shortage of fuel
wood and severe energy crisis. In many cases problems associated with dependence and
excessive use of natural resources are interconnected with respect to the entire fabric of
demographic, economic, social and technological factors. Population growth, coupled with
forest and woodland clearance for agriculture and the growing demand for fuel wood are the
major concern for the last few decades in many developing countries including Ethiopia.
Biomass resources are in a state of being rapidly depleted and their supply is far behind the
required amount. The data for 12 developing countries indicates that for the period 1979-81,
annual consumption of wood ranges from the lowest +21 per cent for Uganda up to +893 per
29
cent for Mauritania, which is excessively more than their sustainable yield
(Turner, 1990:345).
This great dependency on biomass fuel has a number of environmental consequences. “Those
concerned with the environment’s biological balance foresee a potential global crisis if
present trends in biomass use due to demands for energy continue” (Miller, 1986:14). Its
impact is believed to have led to chronic depletion of forest resources, there by resulting in
decline in welfare of households, a reduction in agricultural productivity, and environmental
degradation. For example, this situation is severe in the highlands and midland areas of
Ethiopia, where centuries of cultivation by settled agriculturalists, with poor management
practices, have left the landscape poorly covered by natural vegetation. This destruction of the
vegetation cover has aggravated soil erosion, with disturbed drainage system and water
balance, and ultimately land degradation. Ethiopia’s Central Highlands Plateau loses yearly
more than a billion tonnes of topsoil through erosion because of inefficient farming practices
and deforestation (Miller, 1986:14). In 1990 accelerated soil erosion caused by a progressive
annual loss in grain production was estimated at about 40,000 tonnes, which unless arrested
will reach about 170,000 tonnes by 2010(Mekonnen, 2002:166).
The effects are cyclic in nature: - one factor leading to others, and so on. For instance, the
depletion of biomass resources has naturally brought in shortage of biomass energy supply to
meet the required level of demand, which consequently, leads to higher fuel wood and
charcoal prices, hitting adversely the low layers of society. In Ethiopia, for example, the
prices of a kg of fuel wood and that of charcoal increased from Birr 0.04 and Birr 0.45 in the
1970s to Birr 0.20 and Birr 1.40, respectively, in the mid 1980’s and have shown increasing
trends since then (Getachew, 2002:106). It is further indicated that increase in fuel wood and
charcoal prices has adverse effects on the proportion of the household budget that is spent on
30
fuel, thus cutting the family budget on other basic needs. An increase in biomass fuel prices
would have the greater impact on the expenditure patterns of low-income households. A
welfare monitoring survey by the CSA indicated that households in the lower expenditure
group spend higher proportion of their budget on fuels (9 to 19 per cent) than the highest
expenditure group (5 to 9 per cent)(Mekonnen, 2002:165).
Woody biomass depletion alone is not by itself a problem. Its cyclic interconnectedness with
the whole natural ecosystem is creating havoc for the entire environmental resource base such
as drainage and water balance etc. For example, the depletion of forest resource leads to
diminishing supply of fuel wood and the ultimate result would be fuel wood scarcity. With
fuel wood scarcity, it has been increasingly difficult for the rural masses and the urban poor to
obtain biomass fuels in sufficient quantities and quality, and consequently find there way to a
downward substitute in terms of animal dung and crop residues for fuel. All this signifies a
crisis situation in the household energy sub-sector.
In many localities and places in Ethiopia, people are now left with no choice but to use animal
dung and crop residue as their main sources of energy, which constitutes about 15 per cent of
the total energy supply of the country (MoRD, 2002:5). In this way, if cow dung and crop
residues are used as main sources of domestic energy, they could leave the cropping fields
hardly supplied with adequate organic matter. Such soil not only has low water holding
capacity is also poorly supplied with the basic soil nutrient, provided in small-holder farm
sectors, to produce the maximum possible yields. It is estimated that in Ethiopia some 1 to 1.5
million tonnes of grain production is lost annually as a result of burning dung rather than
using it for maintaining soil fertility (Shibru, 1996:54).
31
In most developing countries, forest resources are highly valued due to several economic
reasons. Apart from environmental advantages and fuel wood supplies, trees serve as savings
or reserves for farmers, which they first revert to at times of food shortages. However, with
depletion of forest resources farmers who are desperate switching to dung and crop residuals
to meet their immediate needs for fuel and as source of income substitutes dung for firewood.
Along with the depletion of forest resources, the demands for dung as fuel is explained by its
value in monetary terms. In some urban centers, the market value of dung for fuel is more
than its value as farm manure and also as compared to the costs of producing firewood from
reforestation (Miller, 1986:49). It is further indicated that in today’s market place, dung
returns are more when sold as fuel than can be obtained on average from grain production
gains realized through its use as farm manures. However, this conversion of dung and crop
residues as fuel has to be more critically analyzed in the light of not only short term but also
long-term costs and benefits in relation to farm productivity, consequent decline in food
production, food security status, and cost of food purchases and other related issues, and their
impact on poverty situation.
2.5. Energy Resources and Consumption Patterns in Ethiopia
2.5.1. Energy Resources in Ethiopia
Ethiopia is believed to be potentially well endowed with energy resources. However, much of
the potential energy resources are not yet available for use and have yet to be exploited
(UNDP/ESMAP: 1996:3). The energy sector in Ethiopia is more explained by the country’s
low level development of potential non-traditional energy resources, coupled by low demand
and its low per capita energy consumption, excessive dependence on biomass energy and very
low efficiency in its use. Nearly all of energy resources of the country are from indigenous
sources and most of this demand is from biomass.
32
As it is compiled by UNDP / ESMAP (1996:3), out of the national total of 239.1 million toe
potential energy resources in the country, biomass constitutes 101.3 million toe or 42.4 per
cent of the total energy resource base. While biomass, is the major form of energy, fuel wood
accounts for an estimated 39.2 per cent of the national total energy resources and the
overwhelming majority of traditional biomass energy resource base in the country (92.3 per
cent).
As noted above, crop residue and dung are considered to be fuels of the last resort. In areas
where forest resources are depleted they play substantial role in the energy supply and
demand balance, especially in the household sector. These two biomass resources constitute
7.6 and 3.2 per cent of the biomass and the national total potential energy resources in the
country respectively (Table 2.1).
Table 2.1: - Ethiopia’s Energy Resources
Total Resources Source
Toe106 %
Modern 137.8 57.6
Hydropower 55.5 23.2
Natural gas 71.8 30.0
Petroleum - -
Coal 10.0 4.2
Geothermal 0.5 0.2
Biomass 101.3 42.4
Fuel wood 93.5 39.2
Bagasse 0.1 0.0
Other Organic Residues * 7.7 3.2
Total 239.1 100.0
*Dung and crop residues
Source: - UNDP/ESMAP, Ethiopia: Energy Assessment, The World Bank, Washington, D.C.
USA, (1996:3).
As is evidenced from the table (2.1), biomass resources remain substantial. However, this
resource suffers from highly uneven geographical distribution on various spatial scales. This
very unequal spatial distribution is the major problem that confronts Ethiopia today.
33
According to different evidences, wood fuel resources are under severe pressure in the
Amhara Region. Some 81 out of 100 Woredas are consuming more than their sustainable
yield of woody biomass in the Amhara Region, and are thus depleting their stock (MoA,
2002: 10).
The problem of the energy sector in Ethiopia is not confined only to the unavailability of the
potential resources, but also the capacity to explore the available potential resources the
country has and the capacity and ability to consume the readily available and developed
energy resources (UNDP/ESMAP, 1996:3). It is evidenced that Ethiopia has vast hydropower
resources but only a small fraction has been developed and utilized. Hydropower is the next
largest indigenous renewable energy resource after biomass, in the country and it is used
almost exclusively to generate electricity. The gross hydro potential of the country is
estimated at 650 TWh per year (Asress, 2002:82). Out of this potential, about 280 TWh/year
(43.1 per cent) is believed to be accounted for by the Blue Nile Basin. Other river basins like
those of the Omo, Baro, Dawa, Genale and Tekeze have an estimated potential of 104, 79, 49,
45.5 and 36TWh/year respectively. The MoRD Rural Energy Strategy Draft Report indicates
that the present aggregate exploitable potential of electric power from hydropower is
estimated to be 15,000 to 30,000 MW. However, though Ethiopia has huge hydropower
potential, it has only partly exploited this huge potential mainly owing to the financial
constraints for dam construction, and lack of bulk demand to justify grid expansion (Trudy,
2002:138). Ethiopia has developed only 450 MW of hydropower, which supplies below 1 per
cent of the total energy consumption (MoRD, 2002:4).
Among other potential energy resources in Ethiopia, natural gas and coal are the two most
important non-renewable fossil energy resources. According to UNDP/ESMAP, it is
34
estimated that some 71.8 million toe and 10 million toe Natural gas and coal reserves are
known to exist in the country respectively (Table 2.1).
However, Ethiopia does not produce petroleum, and as a result it is a net importer of
petroleum and petroleum products. As such, the demands of petroleum are met entirely by
importation, which puts enormous pressure on the already strained foreign exchange budget
of the country. For instance, during 1995/96-1999/00 consecutive five-year periods Ethiopia
imported more than 5.8 million metric tonnes of petroleum products worth 8022.7 million
Birr. These imports claimed 16.5 per cent of the total value of imports and as high as 45.3 per
cent of the total national export earnings for those consecutive five-years period as a whole
(NBE, 2000/2001, Cited in MoRD, 2002:34)(Table 2.2).
Table2.2: - Volume and Value of Petroleum Import in Ethiopia for the Period 1995/96-
1999/2000
Petroleum Import in Birr Petroleum Import
Years In Metric
Tone
In Million
Birr
Total
Imports
In Million
Birr
Total Export
Earning
In Million
Birr
As % of
Total
Import
As % of
Total Export
1995/96 750732 931.9 7708.2 2539.1 12.1 36.7
1996/97 949209 1504.1 8505.2 3485.6 17.7 43.2
1997/98 2017463 2265.5 9338.5 4141.6 24.3 54.7
1998/99 1067457 1309 11702 3569.9 11.2 36.7
1999/00 1094884 2012.2 11438.7 3957.8 17.6 50.8
Total 5879745 8022.7 48692.6 17694 16.5 45.3
Source: - Quarterly Bulletin, National Bank of Ethiopia, Volume, 16,No 3, Third Quarter
2000/2001. Pp.84-93 (Cited in MoRD, 2002:34).
35
2.5.2. Energy Consumption Patterns in Ethiopia
Energy use is predominately centered in most Ethiopia on the household, where traditional
biomass fuels predominate. As per the estimation made by the Ethiopian Rural Energy
Development and Promotion Center, the national total final energy consumption in 1992/93
was 746,238 Tera Joules (Table 2.3). Biomass, principally fuel wood, is the major form of
energy. This accounts for an estimated 78 per cent of the total final energy consumption in
1992/93 in the country. Shares of agricultural residue, dry cow dung and charcoal were
7.3,7.5,and 1.2 per cent respectively (Table 2.3). Thus, the contribution of all biomass fuel for
the national final energy consumption was 94 per cent.
Both the total energy consumption level and share of modern sources of energy consumption
in Ethiopia are one of the lowest in the world. In fact the annual per capita energy
consumption is only 0.8 tonnes of biomass, 20 Kw of electricity and 20 liters of petroleum
fuels (MoRD, 2002:4). Mekonnen (2002:163) noted that the per capita modern energy
consumption for Ethiopia in 1994 was only 21 kgoe, which was only 8 and 6 per cent of the
averages for Sub-Saharan Africa and low-income countries respectively.
The role played by different energy sources varies with the socioeconomic, sub-sectors and
places of residences. The modern energy supply is area, sector-and household-specific in the
country. It is more accessible to towns than to the countryside and is more consumed by other
productive sectors like transport, industry and commerce than the household sector, and more
by the affluent and well-off people than the poor. The household sector is the dominant
energy user, which accounts for 89 per cent of the total final energy consumed in 1992/93 in
the country. However, a total 665,772 Tera Joules consumed, of which 98.6 per cent were
from biomass fuel, and only 1.4 per cent from modern energy sources (Table 2.3).
36
Thus, even though the residential sector is frequently cited as the largest energy consumer in
most developing countries, it account for a relatively very small part of total modern energy
consumption. Out of the national total electricity and petroleum product consumption in
1992/93 the share of the household sector was 38 per cent and 18 per cent respectively in
Ethiopia.
Table 2.3: - Ethiopia National Energy Balance Summary, 1992/93(000TOE)
Sectors Woody
Biomass
Crop
Residues Dung Charcoal Electricity
Petroleum
Fuels Total %
Household 542,141 52,010 53,892 8,565 1,832 7,332 665,772 89.2
Agriculture 0 0 0 0 0 1,497 1,497 0.2
Transport 0 0 0 0 0 26,743 26,743 3.6
Industry 17,101 1,409 1,396 112 1,864 4,573 26,455 3.5
Services 22,110 1,031 1,046 109 1,145 331 25,772 3.5
000
TOE 581,352 54,450 56,334 8,785 4,841 40,476 746,238 100.0
To
tal
Percent 78.0 7.3 7.5 1.2 0.6 5.4 100.0
Source: - UNDP/ESMAP, Ethiopia: Energy Assessment, The World Bank, Washington, D.C. USA,
(1996:5).
The transport sector is the major consumer of modern energy and exclusively depends on
petroleum products. As high as 59 per cent of the modern energy supply and 66 per cent of
petroleum products were consumed by the transport sector alone in the year1992/93.
The industrial sector is also generally one of the major consumers of modern fuel in
developing countries, and next to transport the largest consumer of liquid fuels (Joy, 1981:
112). It is also the case in Ethiopia. Out of the total final energy consumption in1992/93, the
industry sector consumed 14, 39 and 11 per cent of the modern, electricity and petroleum
products respectively.
37
The role played by different energy sources also varies between rural and urban households.
Rural households consumed 82 per cent of the national total final energy (Table 2.3) and 92
per cent of the total energy (Table 2.4) consumed by the household sub sector in 1992/93.
Biomass resources are the major sources for rural households; consumed 99.5 per cent and
only 0.5 per cent were from modern energy. In the case of urban households the mix is
different: the urban households in Ethiopia in 1992/93 consumed 88.7 per cent of the energy
demand from biomass fuels and as much as 11.3 per cent from modern energy source (Table
2.4).
Table 2.4: - The National Household Energy Balance Summary in Ethiopia 1992/93(000TOE)
Sectors
Wo
od
y
Bio
mas
s
Cro
p
Resi
dues
Du
ng
Ch
arc
oal
Ele
ctri
cit
y
Petr
ole
u
m F
uel
s
To
tal
%
Urban 34,969 2,824 3,263 5,856 1,832 4,161 52,905 7.9
Rural 507,172 49,186 50,629 2,709 - 3,171 612,867 92.1
000 TOE 542,141 52,010 53,892 8,565 1,832 7,332 665,772 100.0
To
tal
Percent 81.4 7.8 8.1 1.3 0.3 1.1 100.0
Source: - UNDP/ESMAP, Ethiopia: Energy Assessment, The World Bank, Washington, D.C. USA,
(1996:5).
38
CHAPTER THREE
GENERAL BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY AREA
3.1. Physical Setting
3.1.1. Location and Area
North Wollo Administrative Zone is one of the eleven zones in the Amhara National Regional
State. It is situated in the northeastern part of the Region. The zone is geographically located
between 110N-13
0N longitudes and 38
0E – 40
0E latitude and has an estimated area of
12,706km2, which is about 21 per cent of the Region. It is bordered in the north by Wag
Hemra Zone and the Tigray National Regional State, in the south by the South Wollo Zone, in
the east by the Afar National Regional State and in the west by the South Gondar Zone.
3.1.2. Topography and Soils
According to the data obtained from physiographic division, the Zone comprises of three
landscapes, namely the Plateau, Hill and Mountain, and Rift Valley landscapes. The rift
valley landscape covers approximately 33% of the Zone, while the Hill and Mountain and the
Plateau landscapes together cover 67% of the Zone (ESP, 2002: 8).
The Plateau Landscape: It is part of the Nile drainage system, comprising the southwestern
part of North Wollo. It ranges in altitude from 2700 masl in the west to 3700 masl at their
eastern extremities.
The Hill and Mountain Landscape: It is part of the Tekeze drainage covering the northwestern
part of the Zone. This landscape is highly dissected and comprises of hills and mountains,
39
which mostly have steep gradients. The altitudes range from 1,400 mas1 at the deep Tekeze
gorge in the west to more than 4,200 mas1 at the top of Mount Abune Yosef.
The Rift Valley Landscapes: They form parts of the main Ethiopian Rift Valley System and
are located in the east of the Zone, draining to the east into the Afar plains and Awash Rivers.
These landscapes are generally dominated by flat basin floors, which stand typically at
altitudes of around 1,500 mas1 and are mainly of alluvial origin.
3.1.3. Climate
3.1.3.1. Rainfall
The rainfall in North Wollo Zone is typically characterized by seasonality, poor distribution
and fluctuation (variability) in amounts from time to time and place-to-place. The mean
annual rainfall varies from less than 600 mm to 1300mm with the eastern escarpment
receiving the highest rain and the lower parts in the west of the zone receiving the least (ESP,
2002:6). As in most parts of Ethiopia, the region is characterized mainly by bi-modal rainfall
patterns. The short rains or belg is usually occurs in the period of February to May, the main
rainy season mehere from June to October. In the western part of the zone the short rainy
season becomes less pronounced and more erratic, while the largest part of the western
section of the zone has generally uni-modal rainfall distribution, predominated by the mehere
rain.
According to the study by Co-SAERAR (1998), cited in NUPI (2000:12) the annual average
rainfall recorded at some selected stations of the Zone ranges from 560mm in the North
increasing to 1045 mm. towards the south.
40
3.1.3.2. Temperature
Temperature in North Wollo varies widely through the diurnal and seasonal variations and
with altitudinal zonations. Altitudinal and zonal variations are traditionally categorized under
five temperature Zones (Table 3.1.). These variations range from the warm temperature zone
areas below 1,600 masl ranging to the very cold temperature zone areas over 3,800 masl.
Table3.1: - The Altitudinal Range, Mean Daily Temperature and Area Coverage of
Temperature Zones in North Wollo Zone.
Temperature Zone Altitudinal Range
(masl)
Mean Daily Temp
(oC)
Area Coverage
(%)
Warm <1,600 >21 12.3
Moderately Warm 1,600-2,400 16-21 44.2
Cool 2,400-3,100 11-16 33.3
Cold 3,100-3,800 7.5-11 09.9
Very Cold > 3,800 <7.5 00.3
Source: -ESP (2002), Environmental Profile of North Wollo Zone
3.1.4. Land Use Patterns
In North Wollo Zone land use is dominantly agricultural. Approximately 30 per cent of the
land is estimated to be under cultivation (ESP, 2002: 26), which is more than twice than the
national average of 13 per cent. Agriculture in this zone is dominated, almost exclusively, as
in most parts of the highlands, by small scale and largely subsistence-oriented rain fed crop
production. The remainder of the land is under different types of vegetation (grass, shrubs,
trees) used for extensive grazing.
3.2. Socio-Economic Setting
3.2.1. Population
In 1994 the official population of North Wollo Zone was 1,260,317 (CSA, 1995:33). Using
the 1994 census figures as a reference, estimated total population by 2002 had increased to
1,492,694, (BoPED, 2000:19); of which 746,653 (50.02 per cent) were estimated to have been
41
males and 746,041 (49.98 per cent) females. According to the estimate, some 92 per cent of
the total population were rural dwellers and the remaining 8 per cent lived in towns.
Table 3.2: - Population Distribution of North Wollo Zone by Broad Age Group, Sex and Place
of Residences, 2002.
Total Urban Rural Age
Group Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female
Total 1492694 746653 746041 123826 61934 61892 1368868 684719 684149
0-14 40.00 40.00 39.00 37.00 40.00 35.00 40.00 40.00 40.00
15-64 56.00 56.00 57.00 58.00 56.00 60.00 56.00 56.00 56.00
65+ 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 4.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
Source: - BoPED (2000). Projected Population Size of Zones by Single and Five Year Age
Group, Bahir Dar.
According to the same estimate the broad age distribution of the population indicates that the
0-14 age group represents a high proportion (40 %) of the total population in the Zone (Table
3.2).
3.2.2. Administrative Framework and Settlement Patterns
Administratively, North Wollo Zone is made up of 9 Woredas and 269 rural and 25 urban
Kebeles. The administrative center of North Wollo, Woldia, is located in one of the nine
Woredas, which bears its own name, is a separate urban-based administrative unit comprising
8 urban kebeles.
On the basis of the criteria set by the Central Statistical Office, there are 12 urban centers in
North Wollo Zone. Urbanization in the zone is concentrated in the eastern part along the
north-south trunk road from Addis Ababa to Mekele that provides transport and
communication facilities, marketing and higher order services. The largest urban centers
including Woldia are located along this route.
42
People in rural areas belong to Kebeles that range in population from 4000 to 6500 persons.
The rural Kebeles are divided into smaller units called gotts. The rural settlement pattern in
the zone is highly scattered. This dispersed nature of the rural population is a formidable
constraint for the provision of basic infrastructures like electricity and piped water supply.
3.2.3. Infrastructure
3.2.3.1. Transportation
Transport system plays a major role for the development of a country in general and of an
area in particular. Despite its importance for cultural and social interaction, it can also be
taken as a precondition for proper function of inter-and the intra-regional and urban
interaction. Like in most parts of the country and the Regional State, road transport is the
main mode of transport in North Wollo Zone. This is effected by asphalt, gravel and rural
roads, and the only well developed transport routes are the Addis Ababa- Mekele and Woldia-
Lalibela roads which cross almost all towns of the zone. The main trunk road from Addis
Ababa to Mekele, passing through Woldia, is of considerable economic importance to North
Wollo. Another north-south link is the road from Addis Ababa passing through the zone via
Lalibela, which will ultimately link Addis Ababa with Tigray. In the future, this road may
become as important as the parallel eastern truck road and could give a boost to the zonal
economy. The east-west link gravel road, which connects Woldia with Bahir Dar, is the third
important road that links the zone with the western parts of the region. Now days this road
plays significant role by allowing traffic flow of people to and from Woldia to Bahir Dar,
mainly for administrative purposes.
43
3.2.3.2. Telephone Service
Modern telecommunication service is a recent phenomenon in Ethiopia, and the same is true
for the Amhara Region and North Wollo Zone. Moreover, it is not yet very well developed in
the zone. Except four towns including Woldia, which have full automatic satellite system, all
the rest urban centers in North Wollo Zone still use either semi-automatic or rural radio
communication.
3.2.3.3. Postal Services
Like that of telephone service, postal service of North Wollo Zone is not yet developed. It is
only Woldia, which has got permanent post office, while post agents serve the remaining
towns of the Zone. Though there are about eight post agents other than Woldia, they are found
only in five Woredas of the Zone.
3.2.3.4. Electric Service
Like other physical infrastructures, power service is a recent introduction to most towns in the
Zone. Electricity is supplied from the national interconnected grid system and is available
only in some towns and rural Kebeles. Except one out of the 9 towns and rural Kebeles that
are connected with the national grid system, 8 of them are located along the main Addis
Ababa Mekele road.
According to the discussion made with the Ethiopian Electric and Power Corporation
(EEPCO) Woldia Branch Office Manager Ato Hassen Mohammed, all centers except Lalibela
have receive the electric connection from the Woldia Sub-Station. The Woldia Substation has
6 Mega Watt capacities and of which only 3-Mega Watt power is utilized. This shows that
electricity utilization has not increased as desired.
44
3.3. Forest Resource Base of the Region
Forests have an enormous economic, social and environmental importance in multiple ways.
They serve as the source of wood supply for food, fuel, fodder and grazing, medicinal herbs
and nuts, construction, furniture, infrastructures (in form of poles), etc; and are the major
environmental factor for storage and discharge of water, and for conservation of soils and
land, and the maintenance of overall ecological balance, including several hidden process of
the environment. The forest resources in the study area are important for various above-
mentioned purposes, with their production, protection and conservation services. Although the
contribution of forest resources to the regional economy has not been precisely known, their
contribution stood fourth in the overall Regional GDP and third in the regional agricultural
GDP (AFAP, 1999: 17). As it plays significant role in the regional economy and people’s
daily life, failure in the forest sector, therefore, has considerable negative impacts on the
socio-economy at large. In 1998 forestry related activities contributed an estimated 25 million
Birr to the regional revenue which only relates to direct consumption of commodities like fuel
wood and charcoal (AFAP, 1999: 17).
In addition, forest also has a lot to do with employment. An estimated 70,000 full-time jobs
are provided by forestry related activities in the Region. The contribution of the forest
resource for the socio-economy in countries like Ethiopia, especially in the region is more
pronounced by serving the people’s household energy requirement. Close to 2 million or 65
per cent of the households in the Region use biomass for cooking, and about 62 per cent of
these households use wood from forestlands (AFAP, 1999: 17).
However, despite its enormous life-saving role, the forest resource base of the Region is one
of the neglected sectors of the socio-economy; in fact they are depleting fast and have fallen
45
virtually in to the state of disappearing. At present, the regional forest is estimated to cover
about only 781,115 ha (Table 3.3). These forest resources comprise of natural forests,
woodlands, bush lands, plantations and trees on-farm. Of these forests acacia woodlands
cover about 604,411 (77.3%) of the total forest area, and are mostly found in the remote and
comparatively inaccessible, sparsely populated low lands of the Region. According to
different sources the annual regional wood demand in the Region happens be much above its
sustainable regional supply. The annual wood demand only for fuel and construction is
estimated to be 17 million m3 against 2 million m
3 of the viable annual supply from all
sources (ARCS, 1999). This means the region’s forest resource base is in a critical condition.
This is especially highly pronounced in the eastern parts of the region, which North Wollo is a
part of.
Table3.3: - The Forest Resource Base and its Coverage in the Amhara National Regional
State, 1999.
Forest Ownership and Area (ha) Total Area Forest type
State Community Private Ha %
Natural forest 76840 2000 - 78840 10.1
Plantation Forest 50951 21480 - 72426 9.3
Farm Forest - - 25426 25426 3.3
Acacia Wood land 604411 - - 604411 77.3
Ha 732202 23487 25426 781115 100.0 Total Area
% 93.7 3.0 3.3 100.0
Source: - The Amhara Regional Conservation Strategy, ARCS (1999). Volume I P. 33.
The personal experience of the researcher reveals that forest coverage of North Wollo at
present has become very much thinner and highly depleted. It is estimated that the present
forest cover of the zone has been reduced to less than 1 per cent of the zonal total area, which
is much below the national and regional average. Under the prevailing conditions, it is a
serious question as to how to meet people’s fuel and other demands, which rests on forest and
woodland sources.
46
3.4. Household Energy Demand in North Wollo Zone
Currently, households in general mostly derive their energy from the biomass. According to
the 1994 CSA Population and Housing Census Report, the zonal biomass fuel supply alone
constitutes about 98.2 per cent of the energy demands of the residents for cooking (Table 3.4).
Of which firewood provides 63.5 per cent of the total household energy demand. It was 31.7
per cent for dung or manure and 3.0 per cent for mix of one biomass fuel with other source,
and 0.08 per cent for charcoal. Only 0.2 per cent of the residents derive their energy demands
from the modern energy source (Table3.4).
Table3.4: - Housing Units of North Wollo Zone and Woldia Town by Major Types of Fuel for
Cooking, 1994.
North Wollo Zone
Rural Urban Total Woldia
Fuel Type
No % No % No % No %
All housing unit 274,148 100.0 20763 100.0 294911 100.0 5413 100.0
1 Traditional 271,739 99.1 17809 85.8 289539 98.2 3449 63.7
1.1 Fire wood/leaves 178,228 65.0 8946 43.1 187174 63.5 2188 40.4
1.2 Dung/Manure 93,316 34.0 66 0.3 93382 31.7 4 0.1
1.3 Charcoal 186 0.1 36 0.2 2222 0.1 18 0.3
1.4 Mix of Biomass 8761 42.2 87.61 3.0 1239 22.9
2 Biomass with Modern 1553 7.5 1553 0.5 1241 22.9
3 Modern 135 0.1 483 2.3 618 0.2 393 7.3
3.1 Electricity 37 0.2 37 0.0 22 0.4
3.2 Gas 4 0.0 4 0.0 4 0.1
3.3 Kerosene 135 0.1 361 1.7 496 0.2 286 5.3
3.4 Mix of modern 81 0.4 81 0.0 81 1.5
5 Others 188 0.1 149 0.7 337 0.1 28 0.5
6 Use No fuel 1130 0.4 655 3.2 1785 0.6 276 5.1
7 Not stated 965 0.4 114 0.6 1079 0.4 26 0.5
Source: - CSA (1995). The 1994 Population and Housing Census of Ethiopia, Results for the
Amhara Region. Volume I Part IV, P 119, 124/125, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
As it is depicted in table 3.4, the contribution of one source of energy over the other differs
between urban and rural settlement setting. Biomass fuel, made up of woody (fire wood and
Charcoal) and non-woody material (dung and crop residues), dominate the supply of rural
47
energy demand, (99.1%), as compared to the corresponding urban energy source, (85.8%).
However, the contribution of the modern energy sources (electricity and petroleum products)
was higher (2.3%) in urban areas against that of rural areas, (0.1%).
As it is evidenced from different sources, the type and per capita energy consumption could
be taken as an indication for the level of socio-economic and general level of development
one region has over the others. It seems to hold true almost fully in the case of North Wollo
Zone. In Woldia, the center of administration and the dominant urban center in all aspects, the
contribution of the modern energy source fulfilling 7.3 per cent consumption is higher than in
the total urban sector, (2.3%), in the zone. Thus, the contribution of traditional energy source
is more pronounced in all towns of the zone, (85.8%), than in Woldia, (63.7%). The
difference is more explained by the absence of connection with the national electric grid
system and supply difficulties of kerosene for most towns of the zone.
The overwhelming dependence on traditional energy source is clearly observed in the Zone in
the case of biomass conversion to serve as household fuel demand. The demand for biomass
fuel seems also to have been increasing with the growing demands of energy for household
cooking. According to the national average, fuel wood demand rate stands at 1.6 m3
per capita
per year (AFAP, 1999: 59). As a whole, the fuel wood demand for North Wollo for year 1999
was estimated to be at 1,836,333m3
against 456,980m3
of sustainable wood supply for that
year (Table 3.5). This gap, as indicated in table 3.5, represents the zonal deficit of about 75
per cent of the sustainable wood supply.
48
Table3.5: - Sustainable Wood Production, Demand-Supply Balance in the Amhara Region by
Zone, 1999.
Gap Zone Total Sustainable Wood M
3 Wood Demand M
3
In M3 In %
North Gonder 986,589 1,551,513 -564,928 -36
South Gonder 805,337 1,286,333 -480,996 -37
North Wollo 456,980 1,836,333 -1,379,353 -75
South Wollo 535,082 2,252,500 -1,717,418 -76
North Shewa 577,777 1,643,333 -1,065,556 -65
East Gojam 354,002 1,960,667 -1,606,665 -82
West Gojam 350,052 2,145,667 -1,795,615 -84
Agewawi 261,144 1,232,667 -971,523 -79
Waghumra 64,136 485,415 -421,279 -87
Oromia 82,449 639,333 -556,884 -87
Total 4,473,548 15,033,765 -10,560,217 -71
Source: - AFAP (1999). ANRS. Forestry Action Program Volume I, Main Report. Bahir Dar,
Ethiopia.
According to the 1999 data, the total sustainable wood supply in North Wollo was only to
cover about 25% of the total demand. The figures regarding supply and demand further
indicates that large amount of agri-residue and cow dung is being burnt in homes to fill the
gap. Table 3.5 compares the total sustainable wood supply levels and estimated total demands
for the year 1999, for different Zones in the Amhara Region.
Wood demands for fuel and construction purposes will naturally increase with the growing
population unless assured supply of other alternative fuels are made available in both urban
and rural areas. While the production of wood has not been able to keep up with the growing
demand, at present, the total population size of the zone is estimated to be 1,523,296. With
this number, the demand for fuel wood and construction wood is estimated at about
2,437,274m3 per year (own projection). Although, it is not supported by hard data, the present
woody biomass supply rate of North Wollo could be imagined to have become a deficit,
which was 75% in 1999, and could go as much higher with the current 2003 demand, and also
in forthcoming years.
49
According to the discussion made with the community, the increasing scarcity of fuel wood
supply has become critical in urban areas especially in Woldia, particularly from the last
decade onwards. Therefore, people have been switching fast to relatively cheaper price
sources, like for example the supply of alternative energy sources such as sorghum stalk and
dung cakes. The increasing supply of dung cake to the Woldia market as source of fuel
signifies the fuel wood crisis in the area, with the depleted forest resources in and around the
town. In addition, the recent hike in electricity charges further reinforces this crisis, forcing
more and more urban households to move down the energy ladder, by abandoning use of
electricity.
3.5. Description of the Study Town
3.5.1. Location
The study town, Woldia is approximately located at a conjunction point of11053
lN Latitude
and 39041
lE Longitude, in North Wollo Zone of the Amhara National Regional State. Woldia
is one of the 12 towns in North Wollo Zone and serves as its administrative capital. It is a
nodal town connected by three radial roads with other major towns of the country. It is located
at a distance of 520 km along the main road that stretches south to north from Addis Ababa to
Mekele, and is also connected with the Amhara National Regional State capital, Bahir Dar,
350 kms, Via Woreta - Woldia road to the west.
3.5.2. Climate
Agro-ecologically, the town is spread under mid-highland zone within the altitudinal range of
about 1950 masl, and has a moderate climate throughout the year. The annual rainfall varies
highly. The records of minimum and maximum temperature or moisture show extreme
50
variations of significantly higher range. It has bimodal rainfall, lower amounts of rainfall in
February to May and higher amounts of rainfall from June to October, with mean annual
rainfall of 850 to 1045 mm and mean daily temperature of 200C.
3.5.3. Demographic Characteristics
Woldia is the dominant urban center in terms of population size and basic service delivery in
the study region. Due to its administrative, economic and social significance and locational
advantage over others towns, it comprises over a quarter of the total urban population in the
zone. According to the 1994 Population and Housing Census Report, the town had a
population of 24533 and expected to grow at the rate of 4.1 per cent per annum (CSA,
1995:45). Based on this annual rate of population growth, the population of the town was
projected for the year 2002, at about 34 thousand. Of the total population, 47.6 per cent were
males and 52.4 per cent were females. Young-age population of below 14 years comprised the
largest portion, 34.2 per cent, of total population. People of 15 – 64 age comprise 59.9 per
cent of the total, and the remaining 5.9 per cent are above 64 years. Literacy rate also varies
across gender. As much as 79.7 per cent male, and 57.9 per cent of females were literate. And
68 per cent of the residents at the age of 10 years and above were literate. 11.1 per cent of the
total residents were unemployed.
3.5.4. Activities in the Town
Various types of activities were found to be undertaken in the town. According to the official
records of the Woldia town Municipality Planning and Budget Unit, in year 2003 out of 725
official trade licenses, 331 (45.6%) are retailers followed by service renders (42.8%), Industry
(7.2%) and whole sellers (4.4%). Different sources, for example NUPI (1995, 23), and
51
personal experience of the researcher in Woldia, reveal the fact that the activities in the town
are dominated by small petty trades like Tela rendering, TeJ Bet, bars, hotels and tea rooms.
3.5.5. Basic Service Delivery
The towns of the Zone not only vary considerably in terms of population size but also in the
range and types of the functions they perform and the services they deliver. With all its
function and service delivery advantage, urbanization in North Wollo Zone is concentrated in
the eastern part of the zone. Among which, Woldia is the dominant urban center both in terms
of the functions it performs and scope of the services it deliver.
Until the recent past the town was the only town served with fully automatic telephone service
and even in the present day it is the only urban center in the zone with permanent postal and
banking services.
The town is connected with the main hydroelectric grid system and is supplied with liquid
petroleum by 3 fuel stations located in the town. According to DoPED (2001: 62) the fuel
stations have a total capacity of 241.5 thousand litters (97 thousand litters of diesel, 62
thousands Benzene and 82.5 thousand litter kerosene).
3.5.6. Housing
In 1994 census the number of housing units were counted to be 5413 (CSA, 1995: 148). Of
which, 34.5 per cent of houses were owner occupied, 30.3 per cent were rented from Kebeles
and 25.6 per cent were rented from private households. According to the same source, 39.8%,
28.7% and 27.0% of the housing units had no kitchen, shared traditional kitchen and had
owned private traditional kitchen, respectively.
52
CHAPTER FOUR
SURVEY FINDINGS
4.1. Household Characteristics
4.1.1. Age-Sex Distribution of Sample Household Population
Ethiopia is currently typical of a population with high natural fertility. The age distribution of
the members of the sample households shows that 37.0 per cent of the people were of below
age 15 and 59.8 per cent ranged between the age group of 15 to 64, while the remaining 3.2
per cent were above 64 years old (Table 4.1). This reflects the situation in most developing
countries, where a combination of high fertility and declining mortality results in high
population growth rates and a high percentage of young people.
Table 4.1: - Age Sex Distribution of Members of Sample Households, 2003.
Total Age Category Male Female
No %
<15 115 92 207 37.0
15_64 139 195 334 59.8
>64 4 14 18 3.2
No 258 301 559 100.0Total
% 46.2 53.8 100.0
Males in the study town constitute 258 (46.2 per cent) and females 301 (53.8 per cent). The
sex ratio is 85.7 males per 100 females; while at the national level it is estimated to be 96.9
males per 100 females (CSA, 2000:2).
53
4.1.2. Household Composition
Households in Ethiopia are predominately male-headed. Accordingly, out of the surveyed 120
sample households 65 per cent of the household in the area were male-headed and 35 per cent
female-headed (Table4.2).
Table 4.2: - Headship Patterns of the Sample Households, 2003.
Sex No %
Male 78 65.0
Female 42 35.0
Total 120 100.0
An average household size for the country for urban households is 4.6(CSA, 2000:3), and the
same pattern is observed for the surveyed households of the study town, where the average
household size consisted of 4.7 persons.
4.1.3. Monthly Household Income
The monthly income of the households ranges from the lowest figure of Birr 18.00 to the
highest level of Birr 2575.00. Thus, on average the sample households earn Birr 559.20 per
month each. Our survey clearly indicated that female-headed households are more
concentrated in lower income group, while the male headed were comparatively better off in
their income status (Table 4.3).
Table 4.3: - Monthly Income Distribution of the Sample Households in Birr by Headship,
2003.
Male Female Total Income Group
No % No % No %
< 200.00 10 12.8 17 40.4 27 22.5
200.00_312.00 22 28.2 11 26.2 33 27.5
313.00_800.00 19 24.4 12 28.6 31 25.8
>800.00 27 34.6 2 4.8 29 24.2
Total 78 100.0 42 100.0 120 100.0
54
4.1.4. Housing Characteristics
According to the residential patterns, the data on house tenure status revealed that 45.0 per
cent of sampled households live in their own housing unit, while 55.0 per cent live in rented
houses. Kebele is the chief renting institution, providing dwellings to a sizable 38.3 per cent
households. 14.2 per cent dwellers are rented from private households and 2.5 per cent are
rented from Public Housing Agency)(Table 4.4).
Table 4.4: - Tenure Status of Sample Households Housing Unit by Number of Rooms of the
Housing Unit, 2003.
Total
Tenure Status
Bed
Ro
om
On
ly
On
e R
oo
m
Wit
h
Kit
chen
Mo
re T
han
On
e R
oo
m
Wit
h O
ut
Kit
chen
Mo
re T
han
On
e R
oo
m
Wit
h
Kit
chen
No %
1 Owner Occupied 2 3 5 44 54 45.0
2 Rented 18 14 14 20 66 55.0
2.1. From Kebele 12 13 5 16 46 38.3
2.2. From P.H.A 3 3 2.5
2.3. From P.H. 6 1 9 1 17 14.2
No 20 17 19 64 120 100.0Total
% 16.7 14.2 15.8 53.3 100.0
Indicators on the quality of houses obtained from the survey gave a picture of highly poor
dwelling conditions in Woldia town. About 30.9 per cent of households reside in single room
dwellings (16.7 per cent without kitchen and 14.2 per cent with kitchen), while 69.1 per cent
households live in two rooms units or more dwellings (53.3 per cent with kitchen and 15.8 per
cent without kitchen)(Table 4.4).
4.1.5. Educational Status of the Household Head
Educational levels of heads of the households was found out to be that 34.2 per cent were
illiterate and 15.8 per cent knew only how to read and write, the remaining 20.0 and 20.8 per
55
cent of the groups had passed the primary and secondary examinations respectively. Less than
10 per cent had above grade 12 education (Table 4.5).
Table 4.5: - Educational Level of Heads of Sample Households, 2003.
Sex of the Household Head
Male Female Total
Educational Level
No % No % No %
1. Illiterate 14 17.9 27 64.3 41 34.2
2. Literate 64 82.1 15 35.7 79 65.8
2.1. Read and Write 9 11.5 10 23.8 19 15.8
2.2. Primary 21 26.9 3 7.1 24 20.0
2.3. Secondary 23 29.6 2 4.8 25 20.8
2.4. 12+ 11 14.1 - - 11 9.2
Total 78 100.0 42 100.0 120 100.0
According to the survey result, there was a significant difference in the level of education
between the male heads and female-heads, showing females being far less educated than
males. More than 88 per cent of such females were either illiterate (64.3 per cent) or could
only read and write (23.8 per cent), and only 7.1 and 4.8 per cent had primary and secondary
school level education respectively, in fact, none of them possessed above secondary level
education. Incase of male-heads, only less than 30 per cent were either illiterate (17.9 per
cent) or could only read and write (11.5 per cent); more than 70 per cent, however, had
primary education (26.9 per cent). Among male heads, while 29.6 had secondary school
education, only 14.1 per cent male heads had a higher educational level above secondary
school.
4.1.6. Employment Status
Our survey shows different situations in terms of employment of household heads, the
majority being self-employed (47.5 per cent). Of the remaining group, 25.8 per cent were
employee and only 7.5 per cent enjoyed employer status. The rest were either pensioned and
dependent (9.2 per cent) or unemployed (10.0 per cent)(Table 4.6).
56
Table4.6: - Employment Status of Heads of Sample Households, 2003.
Sex of the Household Head
Male Female Total
Types of Employment
No % No % No %
Self Employed/Own Account Worker 34 43.5 23 54.8 57 47.5
Employer 6 7.7 3 7.1 9 7.5
Employee 30 38.5 1 2.4 31 25.8 Pensioned / Dependent 6 7.7 5 11.9 11 9.2
Unemployed 2 2.6 10 23.8 12 10.0
Total 78 100.0 42 100.0 120 100.0
Disaggregated figures on gender status showed that, 54.8 per cent of women heads were
engaged in their own business, and 7.1 and 2.4 per cent were employer and employee,
respectively. Either as much as 11.9 and 23.8 per cent of the female heads were pensioned or
dependent and unemployed, respectively (Table 4.6).
On the other hand, male-heads comparatively were better off in their employment status. Only
7.7 and 2.6 per cent of them were pensioned and unemployed respectively, while, 43.5, 38.5
and 7.7 per cent enjoyed self-employment, were employee and have the status of employer
respectively (Table 4.6).
4.2. Characteristics of Household Energy Consumption
4.2.1. Fuel Sources
The fuel types commonly used for domestic cooking in the study town include fuel wood,
charcoal, dry cow dung, crop residue, BLT, and Kerosene, only few households largely or
fully used electricity when its supply was regular. Though the degrees of dependence on the
types of biomass fuel widely differ, in one way or another households in Woldia generally
depend on biomass fuel for their daily domestic cooking. Out of the sampled 120 surveyed
households, 51.7 per cent in general have been found to be dependent on multiple fuel
sources, ranging on both modern and biomass fuels, while 47.5 per cent depended only on
57
biomass energy. Reflecting the overall educational and employment, as well as income status,
less than 1 per cent (0.8 %) was found to have used modern energy source (Table 4.7).
Table 4.7: -Fuel Sources of Sample Households, 2003.
Fuel Sources Hhs %
Biomass Fuel 57 47.5
Modern Fuel 1 0.8
Modern and Biomass Fuel 62 51.7
Total 120 100.0
The economic implication of this pattern of mixed energy source use is that multiple fuel
users tend to spend more money on purchasing household cooking fuels than those who use
only single source of fuel. It is observed that those households that depend on multiple fuel
sources spent on average the highest amount of money on fuel for domestic cooking. In
contrast those households that were found to depend only on biomass fuel sources on average
expend Birr 40.60 per month. Those who tended to use multiple fuel sources; i.e on both
biomass and modern energy sources spend Birr 79.70 per household (Annex X).
4.2.2. Principal Fuel Used
Major fuel types used by households differ according to different end uses or food items
practiced within the given household. During the survey, households were asked to indicate
their principal energy sources according to the type of end use commonly practiced in their
home.
Out of the surveyed 120 sample households 117(97.5 per cent), 120(100.0 per cent), 97(80.8
per cent) and 112 (93.3 per cent) of the households under study baked Injera and prepared
wot, coffee and tea in their home respectively (Table 4.8). Such a high proportion of use is an
indication of the importance of the above-mentioned meal items in the study town.
58
Our survey showed that traditional biomass fuel was the principal fuel source with highest
percentage share employed by 98.3 per cent of sampled households for Injera baking, 94.2
per cent for Wot, 96.4 per cent for coffee and 55.7 per cent for tea. In fact, contribution of
modern energy source was minimal except being slightly higher for that of tea, in which
kerosene makes sizeable use (Table 4.8).
Table 4.8: - Principal Fuel Type Used for the Major Types of End Uses by the Sample
Households, 2003.
Injera Baking Wot Tea Coffee Fuel Type
No of Hhs % No of Hhs % No of Hhs % No of Hhs %
Biomass 115 98.3 113 94.2 54 55.7 108 96.4
Wood 109 93.1 30 25.0 5 5.2 18 16.1
Charcoal - - 82 68.4 49 50.5 89 79.4
Dung 5 4.3 - - - - - -
Crop Residue - - 1 0.8 - - 1 0.9
BLT 1 0.9 - - - - - -
Modern 2 1.7 7 5.8 43 44.3 4 3.6
Kerosene - - 7 5.8 43 44.3 4 3.6
Electric 2 1.7 - - - - - -
Total 117 100.0 120 100.0 97 100.0 112 100.0
Further analysis indicated that wood is used as the principal bio fuel source for Injera baking
by as high as 93.1 per cent of households, followed by 4.3 per cent dry cow dung. A minimal
1.7 per cent of the sample households generally use electrical energy for Injera baking (Table
4.8).
It is further indicated that charcoal forms the principal energy source for coffee and wot as
high as by 79.4 and 68.4 per cent of households respectively. While the pattern for tea reveals
that slight difference exist between the traditional and modern energy sources especially with
that of kerosene. Though, charcoal and wood both constitute 55.7 per cent of sample
households’ energy demand for tea, the role of kerosene was also highly pronounced in this
use. Kerosene in particular plays significant role as the principal source for tea making. It
59
constitutes about half the number of households (44.3 per cent) in this sector, sharing almost
equal part as charcoal.
A comparative analysis of different fuel types within traditional biomass fuel group also
indicated that, biomass fuel sources other than wood and charcoal also played some role in the
household energy use. Dry cow dung as the principal fuel for Injera baking was used by 4.3
per cent of sampled households while BLT constitutes 0.9 per cent (Table 4.8). The use of
crop residues was less than that of dung. This may be due to the prevalence of drought in the
study area that prevented crop production and lead to the unavailability of farm wastes in
general.
Though the majority of households depended on fuel wood for Injera baking depending on
the socio-economic status of the given households, electrical energy and other biomass fuel
sources like dry cow dung, crop residue and BLT are thought to be the substitutes for fuel
wood up and down the entire energy ladder respectively. However, several causes like
escalation of electric charges, difficulty to have own electric meter and the financial limitation
of households to have electric stoves, constrained most households to substitute electrical
energy for fuel wood. Instead, households’ stick on wood or its substitutes like dung and crop
residue down the energy ladder in general.
Kerosene was thought to be the substitute for charcoal. However, as our survey revealed, the
substitutes and households preference for fuel depended on the type of end uses commonly
practiced. Charcoal seems to be the commonly used fuel of wot and coffee making. On the
other hand, as noted above, charcoal and kerosene play almost similar role as the source of
fuel for tea making. However, with changes in the socioeconomic status, households are
expected to differentiate the right combination of end uses of their choice with specific fuel
60
type. Thus, it is expected that kerosene could become the fuel for tea, whereas charcoal would
go for wot and coffee preparing.
Therefore, as our study shows, the complete transition from traditional biomass fuel to the
modern energy sources is constrained by a complex combination of factors in countries of like
Ethiopia. Factors like the overall low-level socioeconomic status of the people and lack of
alternatives in the household energy mix, as required by the peculiar demands of the
commonly practiced end uses for traditional biomass fuel, in the typical households of
Ethiopia, in general, and towns like Woldia in particular, may not easily allow for switching
from the predominance of dependence on bio fuels to modern energy sector.
4.3. Households Fuel Acquisition
Households acquire their energy from different sources. This ranges from the free collection
and purchase of biomass to the complete commercialized kerosene and electricity services.
4.3.1. Acquisition of Biomass Fuel
Households were asked about the sources of biomass fuel from where they get for domestic
consumption. The survey result showed that the majority of households acquire their biomass
fuel through purchase (80.0 per cent), and 3.3 and 15.0 per cent fulfill their biomass energy
demand through freely collection in the environs as well as purchase in the local (Table 4.10).
Table 4.9: - Sources of Biomass Fuel Supplies for the Sample Households, 2003.
Source No of Hhs %
Purchased 96 80.0
Collected 4 3.3
Purchased and Collected 18 15.0
Not Stated 2 1.7
Total 120 100.0
61
The table reveals that biomass for domestic energy is now commercialized as a high
proportion of households acquire their biomass fuel through market. This is in agreement with
the result of household energy needs assessment in Wollo and Tigray, where all forms of
domestic energy sources in urban areas are almost entirely commercialized (Oxfam, 1999:
23).
4.3.2. Acquisition of Modern Fuel
4.3.2.1. Kerosene
Unlike biomass fuel sources access to modern energy sources is entirely determined by
market forces. As high as 51.7 per cent of surveyed households use kerosene for their
household energy demands. Among kerosene users, the overwhelming majority (98.4 per
cent) procure kerosene from fuel stations and 1.6 per cent from both retailers as well as fuel
stations) (Table 4.10).
Table 4.10: - Sources of Kerosene for the Sample Households, 2003.
Source No of Hhs %
Fuel Station 61 98.4
Fuel Stations and Retailers 1 1.6
Total 62 100.0
The logical conclusion from the above discussion is that almost about half of the sampled
households do not use kerosene for their domestic cooking. This partially might be explained
in terms of the low-income level of most of the residents, households have difficulty to
purchase kerosene. In addition to this most of the households are not financially able in
purchasing both kerosene, as well as kerosene stove. In Woldia, kerosene stove costs about
Birr 45.00. As such, households prefer to use the easily affordable biomass fuel that they feel
is easier to use.
62
4.3.2.2. Electrical Energy Source
Though the town is supplied with the main interconnected power grid, access to electric
service is determined by the acquisition of own electric meter or by consumers or whether
they can get easily direct connection from electric meter owing households. What makes
electricity different from the other fuel sources; its access is constrained by multiple factors
than in use of any other fuel. About 43.3 per cent of users have direct connection with the
main grid through their privately owned electric meter and 52.5 per cent receive the electric
service by connection from other private electric meter owner households. Only 4.2 per cent
didn’t have any connection with the main interconnected power grid either ways (Table 4.11).
Table 4.11: - Sample Household Electric Meter Connection, 2003.
Connection No of Hhs Percent
Privately Owned 52 43.3
By Connection 63 52.5
No Connection 5 4.2
Total 120 100.0
4.4. Stove Types
Households acquire different types of stoves depending on the number and types of end uses.
In the typical households of Ethiopia, in general, end uses are classified into two major groups
in cooking, i.e. baking and cooking. While baking is generally used for Injera, other meal
items are cooked.
4.4.1. Types of Stoves for Injera Baking
Various studies have shown that the majority of households in Ethiopia own traditional, rather
inefficient open fire stoves for Injera baking. Housewives or maidservants generally make
such stoves domestically, and one does not have to spend money for procuring. In Woldia,
63
almost and as high as 65.0 per cent of households use open fire three stone Injera Mitad
(Table 4.12). Other 25.8 per cent of the surveyed households employ Enclosed Traditional
Injera Mitad, which have better efficiency in fuel use than open fire Mitads. People adopt this
oven as a result of better awareness about shortage of fuel wood production and supply, and
also as a strategy to save money as fuel wood cost has been increasing. Traditionally people in
this area adopted enclosed fireplaces as a strategy to cope with the prevailing fuel wood crises
in the area (Oxfam, 1999: 18).
Table 4.12: - Types of Domestic Appliances Used by Sample Households for Injera Baking,
2003.
Stove Type No of Hhs %
Open Fire Injera Mitad 78 65.0
Enclosed Traditional Injera Mitad 31 25.8
Mirt Injera Mitad 6 5.0
Electric Mitad 2 1.7
Didn’t Bake Injera 3 2.5
Total 120 100.0
Despite two decades of effort to encourage and persuade people to use the modern and
improved traditional stoves for Injera baking, the penetration of the modern and improved
traditional enclosed stoves in the study town is still in its infancy. Modern enclosed and
electric stove users are only 5.0 per cent and 1.7 per cent respectively (Table 4.12).
Though, the residents of Woldia are well aware about the benefit of enclosed stove over open
fire Mitad, they are constrained by several factors from switching over to new model ovens.
Due to its fixed nature and spatial inflexibility to use, improved Injera Mitad requires fixed
and proper kitchen place. The survey results show that even enclosed traditional Injera Mitads
are mostly used by those households, which have their own proper kitchen (Table 4.13). In
general, therefore, households still stick to use open fire Injera Mitad. The other problem is
the financial limitation of households to purchase Mirt Injera Mitd. The cost of one Mirt
64
Injera Mitd is about Birr 50.00, the payment for which has to be in cash. This is obviously
above the financial capacity of most households in Woldia. According to the discussion with
two of the three Mirt Injera Mitad producers in Woldia, most of the residents can ill afford to
pay the required lump sum of Birr at once.
Table 4.13: - Sample Households Mitad Usage by Number of Rooms of the Housing Units,
2003.
Open fire Enclosed
Traditional Mirt Electric
Number of Rooms Hhs % Hhs % Hhs % Hh
s
%
Bed Room Only 14 17.9 3 9.7 - - - -
One Room With Kitchen 11 14.1 6 19.4 - - - -
More Than One Room With
Out Kitchen 16 20.5 3 9.7 - - - -
More Than One Room With
Kitchen 37 47.5 19 61.2 6 100.0 2 100.0
Total 78 100.0 31 100.0 6 100.0 2 100.0
Obviously, in general, households in Woldia still depend more on inefficient traditional open
fire Injera Mitad. This kind of stove cannot trap most of the heat energy, and thereby wastes
lot of energy during combustion process. According to different studies, the efficiency of
open fire three-stone Injera Mitad is only 10 to15 per cent. This implies that, the majority of
households in Woldia lose the lion share of the energy inputs. On the one hand while this
creates a burden on the expenditure of households, it also exerts much more pressure than
required for use on the already depleted biomass resource base of the area, on the other hand.
4.4.2. Types of Stoves Used for Cooking
The pattern for cooking other items of food is quite different. Here varieties of end uses and
their peculiar demand for specific fuels seem to have imposed on households’ burden of
acquiring and choosing different types of stoves. Metal charcoal stove, a traditional and
65
inefficient stove, is alone employed by 28.3 per cent of households along with 20.8 per cent of
other types of stoves, the penetration of the modern and improved stove, is highly
pronounced. Kerosene and Lakech stoves used as cooking appliances are owned and used by
51.7 and 40.9 per cent of households use either as the only cooking stove or use it in
combination with other types of stoves respectively (Table 4.14).
Table 4.14: - Types of Domestic Appliances Used by Sample Households for Non-Injera End
Uses, 2003.
Stove Type No of Hhs %
Open Fires 9 7.5
Metal Charcoal Stove 34 28.3
Lakech Charcoal Stove 14 11.7
Kerosene Stove 2 1.7
Metal and Kerosene Stove 25 20.8
Lakech and Kerosene Stove 35 29.2
Not Stated 1 0.8
Total 120 100.0
One can infer from the above discussion that, major use of stoves is accounted for by its
flexibility in use at any place in or around the dwelling, and also by its relatively easier
availability of varieties of stoves in line with the diversified demands of households in the
town. Stoves other than baking are available in the market with costs ranging from the
minimum Birr 10.00 for Lakech charcoal stove each up to the maximum of Birr 45.00 for
kerosene stove.
4.5. Prevalence of Biomass Fuel Shortage
The overall situation of sustainable biomass fuel supply in terms of the existing and projected
demand in the study area is far on lower side, indicating an overall prevalence of biomass
energy shortage in the study area. This is largely due to the fact that most of the surveyed
households still continue to depend upon biomass fuel especially on wood and charcoal for
66
their daily routine domestic cooking. According to an estimate made on fuel consumption in
the Amhara Region by MoA (2002), assuming the per-capita rates of consumption and the
supply pattern remains constant, a disproportionately high majority of 81 out of 100 Woredas
in the Amhara Region and 8 Woredas in the study area are consuming more than their
sustainable yield of woody biomass.
Table 4.15: - Sample Households Response on the Prevalence of Biomass Fuel Shortage in
Woldia, 2003.
Response No of Hhs %
Yes 105 87.5
No 12 10.0
Not Stated 3 2.5
Total 120 100.0
The surveyed households also seriously feel troubled financially and irregular availability of
biomass fuel in the study town. A vast majority of households (87.5 per cent) reported the
seriousness of the prevailing fuel shortage in the market (Table 4.15). Almost the same
residents (83.8 per cent) reported about a serious shortage of supply from June to September,
while the remaining household heads felt it during October to January. A small number (1.9
per cent) noted shortage from February to May (Table 4.16). It could not be fully possible to
explain clearly, why do they feel and experience shortage at different times of the year, but
some senior residents and biomass fuel sellers responded that different sets of people required
different types of biomass fuel, which are all not available in all seasons.
Table 4.16: - Season of the Year Biomass Fuel Shortage Happen, 2003.
Season of the Year No of Hhs %
June - September 88 83.8
October-January 15 14.3
February- May 2 1.9
Total 105 100.0
67
However, there seems to have been some explainable facts through fieldwork and
observation. This is concerning the fluctuating supplies made in the market, availability of
biomass fuel at the sources, and amount of labour available for the purpose in relation to the
seasons of the year. When the surrounding biomass fuel supplier peasant community members
are busy in their agricultural work in the fields, they restrained their labour from the fuel
business. Some of them indicate that dry seasons are better for them to supply fuels to the
town than that of the wet season, as they can engage in this business as off-season activity or
non-agricultural work. Collection of fuel wood in dry season is also felt to be easier in the
woods in the environs. Moreover, journey to cover the distance up to fifteen to twenty
kilometers back and forth, and collecting from various scattered points in the area becomes
quite an arduous, tiresome and time-taking task in wet season, which is not a feasible
exercise.
4.6. Household Energy Balance
4.6.1. Total Energy Used by the Household
As already noted, commonly practiced end uses by households in Woldia use a mix of both
traditional biomass and modern energy sources. The proportion of mix of diverse sources falls
in line with several convenient factors to the user families, such as their needs and purpose,
socio-economic status, purchasing power, relative costs of different types of fuels, and supply
position, access, dwelling type as having fixed or flexibly shifting cooking site in or outside
the house, and other factors. The commonly used traditional biomass fuels are fuel wood,
charcoal, dry cow dung and BLT, as found suitable for Injera baking and other items of
cooking. As supplements to traditional biomass fuel, households also employ conventional
modern energy sources such as kerosene and electricity for their daily domestic cooking. A
68
modern energy source for cooking almost entirely depends on kerosene with fewer cases on
electrical energy for Injera baking.
On aggregate, the surveyed households used 306,956.0 mega-joules of energy per month on
average for domestic cooking. Biomass constitutes 280,320.4 mega-joules (91.3 per cent) of
this total average per month and the remainder 26635.5 mega-joules (8.7 per cent) is
constituted by modern energy sources (Table 4.17and 4.18).
4.6.2. Biomass Fuel in the Household Energy Balance
4.6.2.1. Fuel Wood
Fuel wood forms naturally the dominant fuel both in its gross weight and energy terms. Fuel
wood constitutes 67.0 per cent of the total 14,776.8 kg of biomass fuel used by sample
households each month on average. In terms of energy content, also fuel wood is still by far
the dominant fuel, contributing 61.7 per cent of the total biomass fuel and 56.4 per cent of the
total household energy consumed on average per month (Table 4.17).
The comparison between the position of fuel wood in terms of its weight and energy content
reveals that fuel wood contribute more in its weight than its energy content. This is mainly
due to the fact that the calorific value of wood is less than that of charcoal, which is a more
concentrated energy fuel. The calorific value of wood is estimated to be about 17.5 mega-
joules per kg of wood (Annex V).
69
Table 4.17: - Sample Household Monthly Biomass Fuel Consumption in Kg and Mega Joules,
2003. n=120
Biomass Fuel Consumption
In Kg In Mega Joules Fuel Type
Total % Total As % of Biomass As % of Total
All Biomass 14776.8 100.0 280,320.4 100.0 91.3
Wood 9898.1 67.0 173,216.6 61.7 56.4
Charcoal 2626.9 17.8 76180.7 27.2 24.8
Dung 951.4 6.4 11416.8 4.1 3.7
Residua 181.0 1.2 2714.7 1.0 0.9
BLT 1119.4 7.6 16791.6 6.0 5.5
4.6.2.2. Charcoal
Charcoal is used as energy source by the majority of the surveyed households for domestic
cooking, especially for that of coffee and for roasting grains which occasionally accompanies
coffee drinking at ceremonial occasions. Charcoal forms the next most common household
fuel after fuel wood. According to the survey, it constitutes 2626.9 kg (17.8 Per cent) of the
total 14,776.8 kg of biomass fuel utilized by sample households per month (Table 4.19).
Charcoal constitutes 76180.7 mega-joules (27.2 per cent) of energy out of the total 280,320.4
mega-joules of biomass fuel and 24.8 per cent of the total household energy consumed by the
surveyed households (Table 4.17). In energy terms, charcoal provides much higher heat than
that produced by wood. The calorific value of charcoal is estimated to be 29 mega-joules per
kg (Annex V).
4.6.2.3. Agricultural Residue, Dung and BLT
As wood is generally felt as scarce and costly, as well as seasonally irregular in supply and
amounts more abundant or accessible but otherwise it is the less favored fuel source.
Agricultural residues and dry cow dung are basically such alternative biomass materials.
These are by-products of agriculture and animal wastes. The most commonly used
70
agricultural residue and animal wastes for household cooking purposes are sorghum stalks
and dry cow dung respectively in the households of Woldia.
Animal dung as domestic energy source contributes about 951.40 kg (6.4 per cent) of the total
14,776.8 kg biomass fuel consumed by the surveyed households per month in average.
Animal dung contribute less in energy terms than its gross weight, which factor signifies the
inferior quality of dung in the energy content as compared to that of fuel wood and charcoal.
Dung constitutes 11416.8 mega-joules (4.1 per cent) out of the total traditional biomass
energy and 3.7 per cent of the total household energy consumed per month (Table 4.17).
Crop residue is also a much less preferred substitute for wood. It is used generally by the
lower income families that can ill afford to pay the increasing price of fuel wood. In the
general household energy balance, however, crop residue constitutes a minimal 1.2 per cent of
the total 14,776.8 kg of traditional biomass fuel. In energy terms also, it constitutes only 1.0
per cent of the total biomass fuel and 0.9 per cent of the total household energy consumed
each month on average (Table 4.17).
BLT also plays significant role in the surveyed household energy demand. It constitutes 7.6
and 6 per cent of the total 14,776.8 Kg and 280,320.4 mega-joules of biomass fuel consumed
by the surveyed households each average month respectively. Out of the total household
energy it constitutes 5.5 per cent (Table 4.17).
4.6.3. Modern Energy Use in the Household Energy Balance
As noted above, households in the study town have switched over to conventional modern
energy sources, although very substantially, especially to electrical source for lighting and
71
other purpose like entertainment, ironing etc. The commonly used modern energy sources
include kerosene, while much fewer cases use electricity.
Table 4.18: - Sample Households Monthly Modern Fuel Consumption in mega-joules,
2003. n=120
Modern Energy Consumption
In Mega Joules As % of Modern Energy As % of Total Energy
All Modern 26635.5 100.0 8.7
Kerosene 26048.0 97.8 8.5
Electric 587.5 2.2 0.2
4.6.3.1. Kerosene
Kerosene is used by 62 (51.7per cent) of the surveyed households. Though kerosene as the
source of energy utilized for all cooking purposes it is more employed for tea making and
some others. According to the information forwarded by the focus group, kerosene is mostly
required to save time and is rarely used for coffee and wot. As charcoal burns slowly, and
could fulfill the demand to prepare tasteful wot and coffee. The surveyed households
consumed 592 liter of kerosene per month, which is equivalent to 26048 mega-joules in
energy. It constitutes 97.8 per cent of the modern and 8.5 per cent of the total household
energy consumed (Table 4.18).
4.6.3.2. Electricity
Though the town is connected with the central power grid, access to electricity is a major
challenge for the majority of households. As it was discussed in part 4.3.2.2, over half of the
surveyed households didn’t have their own electric meter, which may constrain them from
using the electric services, as they demanded.
According to the information, people used electric service mainly for lighting and other
purposes like entrainment, ironing and others than cooking. The total electrical energy used
72
for cooking1 per average month constitutes 587.5 mega-joules (5.7 per cent). It constitutes
2.2 per cent of the modern and 0.2 per cent of the total energy consumed by the sample
households for cooking purposes (Table 4.18).
4.7. Expenditure on Fuel
4.7.1. Energy Budget Share
Households are obliged to devote part of their income for their daily basic necessities, among
which energy for domestic cooking shares significant amount of expenditure. Income of the
household is one of the prime determinant factors whereby the households choose the type of
energy or multiple uses of different energy sources. In line with their daily variety of cooking
stuffs and domestic fuel demand, high-income households are observed as expected to use
multiple fuel sources with varieties of efficient appliances. On the one hand, use of multiple
fuel sources leads high-income households to invest more on energy and on the other hand,
they are obliged to purchase rather more costly but efficient appliances to enable them to use
those energy sources than their counterpart low-income households who are not able to use
these sources. According to different sources owing to the escalation of energy prices and
their dependence on low quality biomass energy sources and use of inefficient appliances, the
low-income households are the ones who use less useful energy and incur high cost per unit
of useful energy than their counterpart middle or high-income households. Thus, lower
segment of the society is forced to invest more on energy as expressed in percentage of total
household expenditure or income levels.
1 For its derivation see Annex VI
73
Figure 4.1: - Sample Household Energy Budget Share as Percent of Total Expenditure, 2003.
29.9
21.3
18.0
12.3
27.3
19.3
15.0
9.5
17.2
10.3 7.6
4.7
8.9 8.4 6.5
4.8 2.6 2.1 3.0 2.6
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
<200.00 200.00-312.00 313.00-800.00
>800.00
Household Income Range
En
erg
y B
udg
et S
ha
re in
%
Total Total Biomass Fuel Wood
Charcoal Kerosene
There is a wide gap between the sustainable and regular availability supply in the market and
the demand for biomass resources. This is more explained by the ever-increasing fuel wood
and charcoal prices, in fact more than twofold within a decade of time span. Coupled with
this, the escalation of all sources of energy prices including all biomass fuel sources and
difficulty to acquire related appliances to use modern energy sources for household cooking is
a great challenge for most households in the study town. Thus, households compete for the
more easily available low quality inefficient but easier to use traditional energy sources.
The low-income households are critically challenged in the choice, access, availability, supply
and acquisition of their energy demand. They depend more on low valued and inefficient
traditional biomass energy sources with inefficient appliances. It means they have to expend
more money in the long run on the whole. Their ovens are inefficient, which much higher
74
percentage of energy emanating from their combustion. The high loss of energy means in one
hand the ever-increasing demand for additional biomass resources, putting a high burden on
resources in general in the environs, and on the other it claims more expenditure to
compensate the high loss of energy to address their basic energy needs.
Obviously, our findings and analysis show that the energy budget share, which is the energy
expenditure expressed as a percentage of total household expenditure, made for fuel increases
as income decreases and vice versa. It ranges from the highest 29.9 per cent for income group
below Birr 200.00 and to the lowest 12.3 per cent only for the highest income group above
Birr 800.00 (Figure 4.1). Disaggregating of the result for specific fuel types also indicated that
the budget share for total biomass and specific biomass fuels took significant part of total
household expenditure, ranging in case of the lowest income group from about 27.3 per cent,
which is almost just about the total energy budget share for the same income group to a trend
of narrowing down towards the highest income group. Even specific biomass fuel sources
claim the highest budget share of the lowest income group compared to the case of higher
income group scaling down toward modern energy users. This signifies that both total and
specific biomass fuels play major role in the energy budget share of all segment of the society,
scaling down from the share of the lowest income group toward higher income groups. Also,
as households scale up from the lowest toward comparatively higher to the highest income
status there is the general trend in equalization of energy budget share made for different fuel
sources.
4.7.2. Total Fuel Expenditure
Depending on different decision-making context levels of factors considered, households are
evidently seen to part their income share differently in terms of different sources of domestic
energy use. On aggregate, the surveyed households spent Birr 8683.30 for total household
75
energy demand, out of which as high as 83.7 per cent was dominantly devoted to cooking
purpose only, and a much smaller 16.3 per cent was for other purposes (Table 4.19).
Table 4.19: - Sample Households Monthly-Total Fuel Expenditure for Domestic Cooking,
2003. n=120
Expenditure Fuel Type
In Birr In %
Total 7265.20 100.0
Biomass 6027.80 83.0
Modern 1237.40 17.0
Disaggregating the findings further reveals that, biomass as the dominant source of energy
constitutes as high as 83.0 per cent of the total monthly expenditure made for household
energy exclusively for domestic cooking purposes, with the balance 17.0 per cent for modern
energy (Table 4.19). One of the characteristic features of the study area is that with the
increasing pressure on the biomass resource base of the area, and depletion of forest resource,
there is a great gap between the supply and demand for biomass fuel. Coupled with this, the
escalation of modern energy prices and unavailability and difficulty of acquiring alternative
sources of energy and appliances further aggravated the problem of most households’ energy
demand. Thus, households are circumstantially forced to expend significant amount of their
budget for daily domestic energy demand. The total fuel expenditure for cooking constitutes
16.2 per cent of sample households total expenditure of Birr 44782.00 made for all purposes.
Of that, the single biomass fuel alone shares 13.5 per cent of the total expenditure made for all
household purposes.
76
4.7.3. Fuel Expenditure on Biomass Fuel
4.7.3.1. Expenditure on Fuel Wood
Our findings show that, monthly expenditure for fuel wood constitutes the highest share of
fuel expenditure made for both total and biomass fuel. Out of Birr 6027.80 spent for biomass
fuel per month by the sample households, Birr 3140.00 (52.0 per cent) was spent on fuel
wood, which also constitutes the highest share (43.2 per cent) of the total expenditure for
household energy (Table 4.20). As noted above, fuel wood is the dominant fuel source for
Injera baking, which purpose alone, according to information, constitutes 50 to 60 per cent of
energy demands in the typical household of Ethiopia (CESEN, 1986:37). Owing to the still
dominating prevalence of the use of inefficient traditional open fire Injera Mitad in most
households, one could deduce this being the driving force for the dominance of wood in the
surveyed household energy balance in terms of both its gross weight and expenditure.
Table 4.20: - Sample Households Monthly Fuel Expenditure for Biomass Fuel in Birr, 2003.
n=120
Fuel Expenditure Fuel Type
In Birr As % of Biomass Energy As % of Total Energy
All Biomass Fuel 6027.80 100.0 83.0
Fuel Wood 3140.00 52.0 43.2
Charcoal 2710.00 45.0 37.3
Dung 105.50 1.8 1.5
Crop Residue 39.00 0.6 0.5
BLT 33.30 0.6 0.5
4.7.3.2. Expenditure on Charcoal
Charcoal is one of the main biomass fuels that comes entirely from energy market supply. It
also constitutes significant part, covering 37.3 and 45.0 per cent of the total and biomass fuel
expenditure made by the sample households respectively (Table 4.20). As discussed above, it
is the dominant fuel source for all cooking purposes other than Injera baking, and is preferred
77
to kerosene by most of the households because of its easiness and multiple uses for different
cooking stuffs. Thus, it stands only next to fuel wood in the energy expenditure balances of
the surveyed households, and also generally in most households, except those families which
have switched to kerosene substantially.
4.7.3.3. Expenditure on Agricultural Residue, Dung and BLT
In areas where forest resource base is depleted and fuel wood therefore is getting costlier,
animal dung substitutes some role of wood as household energy source and thereby entering
into energy market. The survey shows that it has visibly become commercialized on small
scale. Surveyed households spent Birr 105.50 per month for dry cow dung for their domestic
energy demand entirely for Injera baking. It took 1.8 and 1.5 per cent of biomass and total
fuel expenditure on energy respectively (Table 4.20).
Crop residue is also a lower scale substitute for wood for households that could not afford the
increasing price of fuel wood. Crop residue constitutes 0.6 and 0.5 per cent respectively of
biomass and total expenditure made for energy (Table 4.20).
BLT is one of biomass energy sources in the household energy sector of the households under
study. As stated in 4.6.2.3, it constitutes significant part in the household energy balance in
energy terms and also plays like role in the household energy expenditure balance. The
monthly expenditure spent on it is an average of Birr 33.30, and constitutes 0.6 and 0.5 per
cent of biomass fuel and the total household energy expenditure of the sample households
respectively (Table 4.20).
4.7.4. Fuel Expenditure on Modern Fuel
In contrast to the role of the high-energy modern sources in energy terms, the expenditure on
them plays significant role in the household energy expenditure balance. This is because of
78
higher market prices of these fully commercialized products. Sample households consumed
592 liters of kerosene with the total worth of Birr 1183.00, which constitutes 95.6 and 16.3
per cent of their use of modern fuels and total household energy expenditure per month
respectively (Table 4.21). On average, the sample household consumes 4.9-liter kerosene with
an average worth of Birr 9.90 per month.
Table 4.21: - Sample Households Monthly Fuel Expenditure for Modern Energy in Birr,
2003. n=120
Fuel Expenditure Fuel Type
In Birr As % of Modern Energy As % of Total Energy
All Modern Fuel 1237.40 100.0 17.0
Kerosene 1183.00 95.6 16.3
Electric 54.40 4.4 0.7
Though the use of electricity in average household energy services is limited, and it is used
almost entirely for the purposes other than cooking, electric plays significant role in the
household energy expenditure balance. On aggregate households under study spent monthly a
sum of Birr 1472.50 for all purposes for this utility item. Out of this total, electricity for
cooking2 constitutes only Birr 54.40 (3.7 per cent). This is 4.4 and 0.7 per cent of the
expenditure made for modern fuel sources and total household cooking fuel respectively
(Table 4.21). In reality, kerosene dominates overwhelmingly the modern fuel use totally for
cooking purposes other than Injera baking. Only small part of the expenditure is from
electrical energy, which is entirely for Injera baking.
2For its derivation see Annex VI
79
4.8. Factors of Energy Use Pattern
4.8.1. Electric Meter Acquisition and Determinant Variables
For the purpose of this study the researcher considered the residential pattern or house tenure
status, headship pattern and household income as explanatory factors in one way or another
determines households' decision to acquire privately owned electric mater.
Our observation shows that, the residential pattern of households in Woldia is one of the
constraining factors for most of the residents to have direct access to the main interconnected
power grid. According to the survey result households that reside in there owned housing unit
have better access to the main power grid than households in rented housing units
(Table 4.22).
Table 4.22: - Electric Meter Availability by House Tenure Status of Sample Households,
2003.
House Tenure
Owner Occupied Rented Electric Meter Availability
Count % Count %
Total Count
Yes 38 70.4 14 21.2 52
No 16 29.6 52 78.8 68
Total 54 100.0 66 100.0 120
X2= 29.228, DF =1 and P= 0.000
The data implies that the association between house tenure and having privately owned
electric meter is significant at 1% probability level. One can infer from the result that
residential permanency is one of the prerequisite to have own electric meter. Households
living in rented housing units, even if they possess better income, they might be discouraged
from having privately owned electric meter. Thus, most households are unable to use the
readily available utilities. This aspect in turn diminishes the hopes to shift from biomass to
electric use for cooking mainly for Injera baking.
80
Electric meter acquisition also seems to have some patterns of association with headship
patterns of the household head. Our survey indicated that nearly half of male-headed
households acquire their own electric meter. While for female-headed households the share is
about 33.3 per cent (Table 4.23).
Table 4.23: - Electric Meter Availability by Headship Patterns of the Household Head, 2003.
Sex of the Household Head
Male Female Electric Meter Availability
Count % Count %
Total Count
Yes 38 48.7 14 33.3 52
No 40 51.3 28 66.7 68
Total 78 100.0 42 100.0 120
X2 = 2.631, DF =1 and P= 0.105
However, the data implies that the association between electric meter availability and
headship patterns of the household head is not significant (P>10% probability level).
The survey result also indicate that household income level have impact on the acquisition of
electric meter by the household. The share of households that acquire their own electric meter
increase from the lowest 13.5% for households in the lowest income group to 39.5% for
medium income households and further up to 75.0% for the highest income families. And the
pattern for households with out electric meter is the reverse (Table 4.24).
Table 4.24: - Electric Meter Availability by Monthly Household Income of Sample
Households, 2003.
Household Income
Low Medium High Electric
Meter Availability Count % Count % Count %
Total
Count
Yes 5 13.5 17 39.5 30 75.0 52
No 32 86.5 26 60.5 10 25.0 68
Total 37 100.0 43 100.0 40 100.0 120
X2 = 29.986,DF =2 and P= 0.000
Income Range: - Low = Birr < 250.00, Medium = Birr 250.00-Birr 572.00
and High = > Birr 572.00
81
The data reveal that the pattern of association of electric meter acquisition with monthly
income of the household is statistically significant at 1% probability level. Owing to the
overall low-income level of the country in general and towns like Woldia in particular, this
constraints calls for EEPCO to strength the residents capacity by availing credit schemes for
the services it provides.
4.8.2. Domestic Energy Use and Determinant Variable
4.8.2.1. Gross Energy Use and Determinant Variables
Energy consumption for household cooking varied from household to household depending
on family size, and other factors such as standard of living as measured by income, house
tenure whether households reside in owner occupied or rented housing units and availability
of proper kitchen place. According to our survey households with large family members
consume more energy for the daily cooking chore than households with few household
members (Table 4.25).
The data reveal that the relationship between total energy consumption in mega-joules and
household size is statically significant at 1% probability level. One can infer from the result
that head count is one of the determinate factors that determine the amount of energy
consumed by the household.
Table 4.25: - Monthly Total Cooking Energy Use in MJ by Sample Household Size, 2003.
Household Size
Low Medium High Total Fuel MJ
Count % Count % Count %
Total Count
Low 20 48.8 11 31.4 9 20.5 40
Medium 15 36.6 13 37.2 12 27.3 40
High 6 14.6 11 31.4 23 52.2 40
Total 41 100.0 35 100.0 44 100.0 120
X2
= 15.004, DF = 4 and P = 0.005
Household Size: - Low = 1-3, Medium = 4-5 and High = 6 - 11
Fuel Use in MJ: - Low = < 1819, Medium=1819-2841 and High = >2841.
82
Total energy consumption also manifests anticipated kind of relationship with income level of
the household. According to the survey result the proportion of high fuel consuming
households increases as income level rises. It ranges from the lowest 2.5 per cent of low level
consumption to as high as 70 per cent of high energy consumption level for households in the
highest income range and from the highest 70.3% of low energy consumption level down to
8.1% of high energy consumption level for households in the lowest income category
(Table 4.26).
Table 4.26: - Monthly Total Cooking Energy Use in MJ by Sample Household Income,
2003.
Household Income
Low Medium High Fuel Use in MJ
Count % Count % Count %
Total
Count
Low 26 70.3 13 30.2 1 2.5 40
Medium 8 21.6 21 48.8 11 27.5 40
High 3 8.1 9 20.9 28 70.0 40
Total 37 100.0 43 100.0 40 100.0 120
X2 = 56.889, DF = 4 and P= 0.000
The data reveal that the relationship or association between total energy consumption and
monthly income of the household is significant at 1% probability level. The degree of
association indicates that in urban areas where all energy sources are commercialized access
to energy is determined by the purchasing power of the families. Thus, households with better
income level could have better access to all sorts of energy available in the market.
Total energy consumption also has association with tenure status of the household. According
to the survey, households reside in owner occupied housing units consume more energy than
those households reside in rented housing units (Table 4.27).
83
Table 4.27: - Monthly Total Cooking Energy Use In MJ by Tenure Status of Sample
Households, 2003.
House Tenure
Owner Occupied Rented Fuel Use in MJ
Count % Count %
Total Count
Low 9 16.7 31 47.0 40
Medium 18 33.3 22 33.3 40
High 27 50.0 13 19.7 40
Total 54 100.0 66 100.0 120
X2 = 16.364, DF = 2 and P = 0.000
The data reveal that the relationship or association between house tenure and total energy
consumption of the household is statistically supported at 1% probability level. This
association might be due to the fact that the majority of households resides in their own
housing units are the ones who have better income. These households might also be
advantageous in the generation of additional income from house rent. On the other hand
households in rented housing units mostly suffer from additional extraordinary costs like
house rent, since housing expenditure is the largest expenditure for most of the lowest and
medium income families in the town.
Kitchen as part of the main housing units and the place for almost all cooking activities, its
availability expected to exert an impact on the consumption of energy for household cooking.
Our survey indicates that, households with proper kitchen place, 22.2 per cent of them
constituted low fuel consumption and 44.5 per cent high fuel consumption. And the pattern
for households with out proper kitchen place is 56.4 per cent and 10.3 per cent respectively
(Table 4.28).
84
Table 4.28: - Monthly Total Cooking Energy Use in MJ by Kitchen Availability of Sample
Households, 2003.
Kitchen Availability
Yes No Fuel Use in MJ
Count % Count %
Total Count
Low 18 22.2 22 56.4 40
Medium 27 33.3 13 33.3 40
High 36 44.5 4 10.3 40
Total 81 100.0 39 100.0 120
X2
= 18. 462, DF = 2 and P = 0.000
The data reveal that the association between total energy consumption and availability of
proper kitchen place is statistically supported at 1% probability level. The association is might
be due to the fact that as most of the households prepared Injera in the home and as it is the
major fuel consuming activity and demanding proper fixed place to install the appliances,
households who didn't have proper kitchen place may constrained from baking as they
demanded. Thus, they might reduce the fuel consumption per the reasons mentioned above.
4.8.2.2. Biomass Energy and Determinant Variables
The aggregate sum of biomass fuel consumed for domestic cooking purpose also bears
anticipated relationship with household size. According to our survey, households with large
family member more represented in the highest biomass fuel consumption range and
households with few family members are the reverse (Table 4.29).
Table 4.29: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Use in MJ by Sample Household Size, 2003.
Household Size Biomass Fuel in MJ
Low Medium High
Total
Count
Low 19 46.3 10 28.6 11 25.0 40
Medium 12 29.3 14 40.0 9 20.5 35
High 10 24.4 11 31.4 24 24.5 45
Total 41 100.0 35 100.0 44 100.0 120
X2
= 11.422, DF= 4 and P = 0.022
Biomass Fuel in MJ: - Low = < 1703, Medium = 1703-2534 and High=>2534
85
The data implies that, the relationship between biomass fuel consumption and household size
is significant at 5% probability level. One could infer from the finding that as energy for
cooking is one of the most important inputs of food items that demanded by the household
members on daily basis; thus, households with large member size could exert an influence on
the consumption of biomass fuel for cooking.
Total biomass fuel consumed by households is also substantially influenced by monthly
income of the household. Households within the low-income range constituted more within
low-level consumption than the high-income families. On the other hand only 7.5 per cent
households with large family member consume less biomass and about three quarter of the
same group consume high amount of biomass fuel as compared to 13.5 percent of the lowest
income group for the same consumption level (Table 3.30).
Table 4.30: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Use in MJ by Sample Household Income, 2003.
Household Income
Low Medium High Biomass Fuel in MJ
Count % Count % Count %
Total
Count
Low 25 67.6 12 27.9 3 7.5 40
Medium 7 18.9 21 48.8 7 17.5 35
High 5 13.5 10 23.3 30 75.0 45
Total 37 100.0 43 100.0 40 100.0 120
X2
= 53.304, DF = 4 and P = 0.000
The data reveal that the association between biomass fuel consumption and income level of
the household is statistically supported at 1% probability level. This might be due to the fact
that all energy sources including biomass fuel in urban area became commercialized, and
access to the source nearly all determined by market forces. Thus, households with better
income status could have better access to all fuel sources including biomass fuel.
86
Per reasons discussed in part 4.8.2.1, the residential pattern, whether households reside in
owner occupied or rented housing units could exert an influence on the consumption of
biomass energy for domestic cooking. According to our survey, households residing in owner
occupied housing units more belong to the highest biomass fuel consuming group and only
18.5 per cent of households in the same group fall under low level consuming group. The
pattern for households from rented housing units is 25.8 and 45.4 per cent respectively
(Table 4.31).
Table 4.31: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Use in MJ by House Tenure Status of Sample
Household, 2003.
House Tenure
Owner Occupied Rented Total Count
Biomass Fuel in MJ
Count % Count %
Low 10 18.5 30 45.4 40
Medium 16 29.6 19 28.8 35
High 28 51.9 17 25.8 45
Total 54 100.0 66 100.0 120
X2
= 11.865, DF = 2 and P= 0.003
The data reveal that, the association between biomass fuel use and house tenure status of the
household is statistically supported at 1% probability level.
Our survey also indicates that biomass fuel consumption has some sort of association with
kitchen availability. The majority of households with proper kitchen place consume high
biomass fuel (46.9%) as compared to 17.9% of households` with out kitchen facility (Table
4.32).
87
Table 4.32: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Use in MJ by Kitchen Availability of Sample
Households, 2003.
Kitchen Availability
Yes No Biomass Fuel in MJ
Count % Count %
Total Count
Low 18 22.2 22 56.5 40
Medium 25 30.9 10 25.6 35
High 38 46.9 7 17.9 45
Total 81 100.0 39 100.0 120
X2 = 15 .367, DF =2 and P= 0.000
The data reveal that the association between biomass fuel consumption and availability of
proper kitchen place is statistically significant at 1% probability level. Per the reason
discussed above, as far as Injera baking is concerned, the major fuel consuming and fixed
kitchen-demanding chore that prepared in the majority of households, households with out
proper kitchen place were constrained from baking, as they demanded. Due to the challenges
faced by these households could have employed their own coping mechanisms such as
reducing the frequency of baking or changing their feeding habit that demanded lesser fuel as
compared to Injera baking.
4.8.2.3. Kerosene Use in MJ and Determinant Variables
As it was mentioned in part 4.2.2 kerosene and electricity are the commonly used
conventional modern energy sources in the study town. The majority of households employed
kerosene for their daily domestic cooking, and rarely in fewer cases electrical energy for
Injera baking. Due to the insignificant contribution of electrical energy for domestic cooking
all the analysis for modern energy sources represented by kerosene. Households with fewer
family members mainly fall under low-level kerosene fuel users (78.0 per cent) and only 22.0
per cent of the shares belong to the highest kerosene users category. And the patterns towards
88
the average and highest family size is the reverse; higher kerosene users out weighted the
lowest kerosene user families (Table 4.33).
Table 4.33: - Monthly Kerosene Use in MJ by Sample Household Size, 2003.
Household Size
Low Medium High Kerosene Use in MJ
Count % Count % Count %
Total
Count
Low 32 78.0 22 62.9 20 45.5 74
High 9 22.0 13 37.1 24 54.5 46
Total 41 100.0 35 100.0 44 100.0 120
X2
= 9.568, DF = 2 and P= 0.008
Kerosene Use in MJ: - Low = < 264 and High = 264 - 1377
The data reveal that, the amount of kerosene consumption is associated with household size at
1% probability level. The result indicates that whenever kerosene was used for the daily
cooking food items, the household size that exert demand for food items on daily basis forced
households to acquire more kerosene as demanded by the growing number of family
members.
The share of kerosene user households also has general trends of increasing with monthly
income of the household. The proportion of high amount of kerosene user households
increase from the lowest 5.4 per cent households in low income group to 30.2 per cent for the
average income families and further up to 77.5 per cent for the highest income families
(Table 4.34). And the patterns for the lowest kerosene user families is the reverse, that ranges
from the highest 94.6 per cent for low income families to 69.8 per cent for an average income
families and further down to 22.5 per cent for the highest income families.
Table 4.34: - Monthly Kerosene Use in MJ by Sample Household Income, 2003.
Household Income
Low Medium High Kerosene Use in MJ
Count % Count % Count %
Total
Count
Low 35 94.6 30 69.8 9 22.5 74
High 2 5.4 13 30.2 31 77.5 46
Total 37 100.0 43 100.0 40 100.0 120
X2 = 44.122, DF, = 2 and P = 0.000
89
The data reveal that household income has impact on the amount of kerosene at 1%
probability level. This association might be due to the fact that high quality and efficient
modern fuel sources as represented by kerosene are completely commercialized, and their
access is determined by the socioeconomic status of households in the market. Thus, those
households with better income status could have better opportunity to acquire related
appliances and thereby to expend and use the available modern energy sources (Table 4.34).
House tenure status also considered to be one of the determinant factor that determine
households dependence on certain type of fuel for household cooking. Our survey indicate
that households reside in owner occupied housing units equally fall under the lowest and the
highest kerosene user category and households in rented housing units more belongs to low
kerosene fuel user (71.2%) and the balance 28.8 % constituted by the highest kerosene users.
The data reveal that kerosene use associated with house tenure status of the household at 5%
probability level (Table 4.35).
Table 4.35: - Monthly Kerosene Use in MJ by Tenure Status of Sample Households, 2003.
House Tenure
Owner Occupied Rented Kerosene Use in MJ
Count % Count %
Total Count
Low 27 50.0 47 71.2 74
High 27 50.0 19 28.8 46
Total 54 100.0 66 100.0 120
X 2 = 5.653, DF = 1 V= 0.2 and P = 0.017
Kitchen as the place for cooking food items have an impact on the consumption of household
energy for cooking. According to the survey result availability of kitchen place seems to have
some influence on the consumption of kerosene. Households with proper kitchen place
consume more kerosene than households with out proper kitchen place. Though the trend
shows some sort of relationship, the association is not statistically supported (11.3%
90
probability level)(Table 4.36). This might be due to the fact that kerosene as domestic
cooking fuel allow spatial flexibly of use at any place of the housing units wherever the place
is available. This spatial flexibility in the use of kerosene at any place of the home
environment might be the reason behind for the consumption of kerosene that made its utility
out of the influence of available kitchen places.
Table 4.36: - Monthly Kerosene Use in MJ by Kitchen Availability of Sample Households,
2003.
Kitchen Availability
Yes No
Kerosene Use in MJ
Count % Count %
Total Count
Low 46 56.8 28 71.8 74
High 35 43.2 11 28.2 46
Total 81 100.0 39 100.0 120
X2
= 2.507, DF =1 and P = 0.113
4.8.3. Fuel Expenditure and Determinant Variables
Depending on different decision-making contexts households expend part of their income for
different fuel sources. Low-level fuel expenditure more constituted by households with few
family members than households with highest family size. And the pattern for the highest
expenditure category is the reverse (Table 4.37). The same pattern is also observed for the
total and specific fuel sources as represented by biomass (Table 4.38) and kerosene fuel
sources (Table 4.39).
Table 4.37: - Monthly Total Fuel Expenditure in Birr by Sample Household Size, 2003.
Household Size
Low Medium High Total Fuel Expenditure
Count % Count % Count %
Total
Count
Low 19 46.4 10 28.6 10 22.7 39
Medium 16 39.0 13 37.1 11 25.0 40
High 6 14.6 12 34.3 23 52.3 41
Total 41 100.0 35 100.0 44 100.0 120
X2
= 14.144, DF = 4 and P= 0.007
Total Fuel Expenditure: - Low = < Birr 40, Medium = Birr 40.00-Birr 66 and High= >Birr 66
91
Table 4.38: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Expenditure in Birr by Sample Household Size,
2003.
Household Size
Low Medium High Biomass Fuel Expenditure
Count % Count % Count %
Total
Count
Low 19 46.4 11 31.4 10 22.7 40
Medium 14 34.1 14 40.0 12 27.3 40
High 8 19.5 10 28.6 22 50.0 40
Total 41 100.0 35 100.0 44 100.0 120
X2
= 10.818, DF= 4 and P= 0.029
Biomass Fuel Expenditure: - Low = < 37, Medium = Birr 37.00-Birr 56 and High = >Birr56
Table 4.39: - Monthly Kerosene Expenditure in Birr by Sample Household Size, 2003.
Household Size
Low Medium High Kerosene Expenditure
Count % Count % Count %
Total
Count
Low 32 78.0 22 62.9 20 45.5 74
High 9 22.0 13 37.1 24 54.5 46
Total 41 100.0 35 100.0 44 100.0 120
X2
= 9.568, DF = 2 and P = 0.008
Kerosene Expenditure: - Low = < Birr12and High=Birr12.00-Birr 76.00
The data reveal that, the association of expenditure made for the above mentioned fuel
sources and household size is statistically supported at 1% probability level for the total and
kerosene fuel and at 5% probability level for biomass fuel source.
Household income is one of the most determinant factors that enable households to choose
and expend part of their income for domestic energy. The general patterns of expenditure
made for household cooking fuel indicate that as one starts scaling up from the lowest to the
highest income group expenditure made for domestic fuel increases. The proportion of
households with minimum fuel expenditure for total energy ranges from the highest 70.3% for
households in the lowest income category to 30.2% for the median income group and further
down to 0% for the highest income families (Table 4.40). And though it differs, the same
pattern is also observed for biomass (Table 4.41) and kerosene (Table 4.42) fuel expenditure.
92
The data reveal that fuel expenditure made for both sources have significant association with
household income at 1% of significant level.
Table 4.40: - Monthly Total Fuel Expenditure in Birr by Sample Household Income, 2003.
Household Income
Low Medium High Total Fuel Expenditure
Count % Count % Count %
Total
Count
Low 26 70.3 13 30.2 0 0.0 39
Medium 10 27.0 19 44.2 11 27.5 40
High 1 2.7 11 25.6 29 72.5 41
Total 37 100.0 43 100.0 40 100.0 120
X2
= 60.530, DF = 4 and P = 0.000
Table 4.41: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Expenditure in Birr by Sample Household
Income, 2003.
Household Income
Low Medium High Biomass Fuel Expenditure
Count % Count % Count %
Total
Count
Low 25 67.6 14 32.6 1 2.5 40
Medium 8 21.6 20 46.5 12 30 40
High 4 10.8 9 20.9 27 67.5 40
Total 37 100.0 43 100.0 40 100.0 120
X2 = 49.945, DF = 4 and P = 0.000
Table 4.42: - Monthly Kerosene Expenditure in Birr by Sample Household Income, 2003.
Household Income
Low Medium High Kerosene Expenditure
Count % Count % Count %
Total
Count
Low 35 94.6 30 69.8 9 22.5 74
High 2 5.4 13 30.2 31 77.5 46
Total 37 100.0 43 100.0 40 100.0 120
X2= 44.122, DF = 2 and P = 0.000
Residential pattern is one of the socioeconomic factors that make differences among
households. Households having privately owned housing units have better opportunity to
reside permanently in the same housing units. Such patterns of residential advantage might
have encouraged households to posses permanent equipments used for cooking. In addition
households having their own housing units also free from high price housing rent which may
93
helps us to explain the significant expenditure share of households reside in rented private
households. The advantage of having own housing units seems to reflect in the expenditure
patterns of households made for fuel. The general trends in energy expenditure made for
domestic energy indicate that, the highest expenditure made for fuel is largely constituted by
households from owner occupied housing units (Table 4.43, 4.44 and 4.45). The data revealed
that the association between fuel expenditure and residential patterns of the household is
statistically supported at 5% probability level for both total energy and kerosene and at 10%
level for biomass fuel source.
Table 4.43: - Monthly Total Fuel Expenditure in Birr by House Tenure Status of Sample
Households, 2003.
House Tenure
Owner Occupied Rented
Total Fuel Expenditure Count % Count %
Total Count
Low 15 27.8 24 36.4 39
Medium 13 24.1 27 40 40
High 26 48.1 15 22.7 41
Total 54 100.0 66 100.0 120
X2 =8.816, DF = 2 and P= 0.012
Table 4.44: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Expenditure in Birr by House Tenure Status of
Sample Households, 2003.
House Tenure
Owner Occupied Rented Biomass Fuel Expenditure
Count % Count %
Total Count
Low 14 25.9 26 39.4 40
Medium 16 29.6 24 36.4 40
High 24 44.5 16 24.2 40
Total 54 100.0 66 100.0 120
X2 = 5.657, DF = 2 and P = 0.059
94
Table 4.45: - Monthly Kerosene Expenditure in Birr by House Tenure Status of Sample
households, 2003.
House Tenure
Owner Occupied Rented
Kerosene Expenditure
Count % Count %
Total Count
Low 27 50.0 47 71.2 74
High 27 50.0 19 28.8 46
Total 54 100.0 66 100.0 120
X2
= 5. 653, DF = 1 and P= 0.017
Availability of proper kitchen place also has its own impacts on fuel expenditure patterns of
households. According to our survey the significant majority of households with a proper
kitchen place made the highest expenditure for fuel than households with out a proper kitchen
place. This is highly pronounced for both the total and biomass fuel sources than the modern
energy sources as represented by kerosene. The data revealed that expenditure made for both
the total and biomass fuel sources is significantly associated with availability of kitchen at 1%
probability level for both the sum total fuel and biomass fuel (Table 4.46 and 4.47). On the
other hand the association between fuel expenditure made for kerosene and kitchen place is
not statistically significant (11.3% significant level)(Table 4.48). This pattern might be due to
the fact that fuel expenditure made for total energy and biomass fuel as dominated by fuel
wood and as it is also influenced by Injera baking, one could explain how the availability of
kitchen place exert an impact on the expenditure patterns of households made for total energy
and biomass fuel sources.
Table 4.46: - Monthly Total Fuel Expenditure in Birr by Kitchen Availability of Sample
Households, 2003.
Kitchen Availability
Owner Occupied Rented
Total Fuel Expenditure
Count % Count %
Total Count
Low 20 24.7 19 48.7 39
Medium 26 32.1 14 35.9 40
High 35 43.2 6 15.4 41
Total 81 100.0 39 100.0 120
X2
= 10.755, DF =2 and P=0.005
95
Table 4.47: - Monthly Total Biomass Fuel Expenditure in Birr by Kitchen Availability of
Sample Households, 2003.
Kitchen Availability
Owner Occupied Rented Biomass Fuel Expenditure
Count % Count %
Total Count
Low 19 23.5 21 53.9 40
Medium 27 33.3 13 33.3 40
High 35 43.2 5 12.8 40
Total 81 100.0 39 100.0 120
X2
= 14. 587, DF = 2 and P= 0.001
Table 4.48: - Monthly Kerosene Expenditure in Birr by Kitchen Availability of Sample
Households, 2003.
Kitchen Availability
Yes No
Kerosene Expenditure Count % Count %
Total Count
Low 46 56.8 28 71.8 74
High 35 43.2 11 28.2 46
Total 81 100.0 39 100.0 120
X2
= 2. 507, DF =1 and P = 0.113
96
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
Energy as a whole and household energy in particular is a basic requirement for human life.
Households require energy for their subsistence; they need energy for cooking, lighting,
heating and cooling different items. Most households in Ethiopia, in both urban and rural
areas, largely depend on biomass energy sources for household energy consumption. Ethiopia
is one among several poor Sub Saharan African countries, like Kenya, Tanzania, and Malawi
where over 80% of their energy requirements are obtained from fuel wood and other biomass
energy sources. Studies show that biomass fuel such as fuel wood, charcoal, agricultural
residues and dry cow dung account for more than 98.6 per cent of the total domestic energy
demand in Ethiopia.
Due to the high level of consumption combined with wasteful utilization and heavy reliance
on biomass for cooking, Ethiopia has encountered severe deforestation and environmental
degradation problems. The study town and its hinterland from where biomass fuel is extracted
and supplied are among the most drought-prone and environmentally degraded areas of the
country. The natural vegetation resources especially that of biomass is severely degraded. In
light of population growth, expansion of farmland, pastures and excessive, unplanned and
unsystematic woodcutting, forest areas are further decreasing. As in many parts of the
country, in North Wollo Zone, fuel wood demand is by far in excess of the sustainable supply,
as clearly demonstrated by the total projected fuel wood deficit of 1.4 million m3 (75 per cent)
by the year 1999. Many people especially the poor suffer the most, and are forced to further
exploit the environment or procure at high prices from the market to acquire biomass fuel for
their household energy need.
97
Despite the fact that Ethiopia has a huge potential of hydropower and other alternative
renewable energy sources that can be potentially developed, most of them are not fully
tapped. Fuel wood and probably cow dung are still the sources of energy for the majority of
the population. Non-critical zone resources like solar energy and wind power are entirely
untapped. Even critical-zone renewable resources like woodlands and forest, cow dung and
other biomass fuels like sugarcane chaffs, straw and leaves and twigs etc are most
inefficiently and wastefully used. Cow dung is used as raw for manures on farm plots or as
dry stuff in the ovens; they could be composed to better manures or turned into biogas energy
in households for cooking, heating and lighting. Charcoal making is also highly wasteful
process. Hydro-electrical sources have been tapped only to a small extent as compared to the
country’s potential. Fossil fuel resources are also said to be potentially available in some
sedimentary basins, but most Ethiopian earth still remains geologically unexplored owing to
the sophisticated geophysical, geochemical factors and other prevailing systems.
The lack of human capital such as technology, motivation, general and technical education
and social conflicts have constantly put barriers in resource development. In addition low-
income levels also prevent many households from using modern appliances and switching to
the use of higher-grade fuels. The prevailing constraints that hinder the fulfillment of the
household energy need explain the unprecedented demands for fuel wood and other forms of
biomass energy.
Household energy for cooking for urban households in the study area is primarily biomass
fuel. According to the 1994 CSA Census report, out of the total 20,763 housing units in towns
of North Wollo zone, about 85.8 per cent of the housing units exclusively depended on
biomass fuel sources for their domestic cooking (1995:124/5). Identical pattern was also
observed in Woldia town.
98
The study shows that major fuel types used by households for domestic cooking are fuel
wood, charcoal, kerosene, BLT, dry cow dung, crop residue and electricity in their order of
importance. The overall balance indicates that biomass fuel sources constitute the larger
proportion (91.3 %) of energy for household cooking as compared to the conventional modern
energy sources (8.7 %).
In urban areas, fuels are traded and marketed commodities, whether they are wood, charcoal,
fossil fuel or electricity. Households in Woldia acquire biomass fuels through purchase and
with fewer cases through collection on their own labour in the surrounding environs. The
diversified demand for energy in the urban areas coupled with the monetization of energy
services means that households, especially the poor, compete for energy with the affluent and
productive sectors of the economy. These situations exert a pressure on many households in
small towns to spend a relatively high proportion of their income to meet basic energy needs.
With regard to energy utilization efficiency, the study revealed that households in Woldia
depend on inefficient traditional open fire stoves or ovens for cooking and baking. A
significant portion of households (65.0 per cent), use inefficient open fire three stone
traditional Mitad for Injera baking. Households who use the traditional enclosed Injera Mitad
and the improved Mirt Injera Mitad are 25.8 and 5.0 per cent respectively. Only 1.7 per cent
of households were found to be users of electric Mitad.
Dwelling types such as having a fixed kitchen or absence of kitchen exert an influence on the
acquisition and use of appliances used for baking. Improved Injera Mitad is inflexible to use;
it needs fixture and resultant site. This means the improved Injera Mitad demands fixed and
proper kitchen place. Thus, enclosed Mirt Mitad, including the traditional one is mainly used
by households that have proper kitchen place. The other problem is the financial limitation of
99
households to purchase Mirt Injera Mitad. Hence, households tend to use open fire Injera
Mitad, which wastes high amount of biomass energy source of fuel. The high and direct
dependence on biomass fuels coupled with low efficiencies in its end use at household level,
mainly for cooking on open fire, are contributing to unnecessary high level of biomass
resource extraction and consumption. This pressure has led to the enormous depletion of
forest and/or woodland resources resulting in serious shortage of fuel wood and severe energy
crisis. It also leads to higher wood and charcoal prices, hitting adversely all consumers but
most critically the low-income groups.
A large portion of households (87.5 per cent) reported that biomass fuel shortage is a growing
and serious problem in Woldia. The problem has become worse and severe since the last
decade. This is partly explained by the ever-increasing fuel wood and charcoal prices, which
exert adverse effects on the proportion of the household budget for fuel, consequently cutting
the family budget for other basic needs. The study findings indicate that households in the
lower income and expenditure group spend higher proportion of their budget on fuel than the
highest income and expenditure group.
The study also revealed that socioeconomic status like income of the household plays a
critical role in the preference and consumption of energy for household cooking. It was
observed that other things being the same, households with high monthly income consume
more energy and have better access to the efficient and modern energy sources than the lower
income families.
For countries like Ethiopia where generally multiple dishes are prepared using several major
fuel types used for domestic cooking, energy consumption differ according to different food
items prepared within the households. Owing to the overall low-level of socioeconomic
100
status of the people and the lack of alternatives for balanced household energy mix, and the
peculiar demand of households for traditional biomass fuel for certain food items, a typical
urban household in Ethiopia in general and in towns like Woldia in particular depends on
traditional biomass fuel as a major source of energy. This is partly because some traditional
fuels are needed for specific type of cooking. The study also shows that families may use
different types of fuels and stove types but seldom leave the traditional fuel or stove types
completely.
Generally, the study has revealed that households in Woldia dominantly rely on biomass fuels
for domestic cooking purpose. This trend seems to continue dominating the household’s
energy consumption for quite a long time to come. Since the 1980s, the supply side
intervention to mitigate the energy crisis at the macro and household level was considered as
an important solution to the problem. However, observations by this researcher, the
discussions made with various informants and facts from the documents reviewed have
confirmed that the level of achievement in this regard has been generally poor and
disappointing. As a response, demand side interventions from the consumers’ decision context
were given particular attention to positively influence the current energy demand and
consumption pattern. However, this strategy also seems to be very slowly coming forth as the
two important factors of stagnant income level and the growing number of people militates
against its likelihood.
Under the current limitations in both the traditional and modern energy sectors as per reasons
explained above and the inefficient mode of fuel utilization, the improvements of energy
efficiency in different sectors, in particular increasing end use efficiency at the household
level should be taken as a prerequisite to tackle energy and energy-related problems at the
101
household level. Konemund (2002:139) notes that fuel saving stoves would have a cost
effective solution, environmental protection and improved livelihood and they can also have
significant economic effects on both at the household level and at the macro economy level at
large. This possibility may also lead to regeneration of woodlots and biomass supply.
Therefore, based on the findings of the study, the following issues are identified for further
consideration to tackle household energy-related problems in urban areas.
• In general, households in Woldia are aware of the benefits of fuel saving as reflected
in their slowly emerging trend in the use of enclosed traditional stove in some
households. Therefore, further promotion activities to use improved stove such as
comparative cooking demonstration, like three stone fire versus improved stove as
well as joint discussion with the community at places of social, cultural and religious
events have to be conducted.
• Empowering the local improved stove producers by providing loans in the form of
revolving fund so as to improve production and marketing.
• Urban household energy problems should also be considered inline with other
development endeavors. Like improving the quality of housing and solving urban
housing problem should be taken as one part of solving urban households’ energy
problem.
• The demand side management of household energy should be given due emphasis and
considered as important as the supply side. Different institutions working in the area
of afforestation and natural resource protection and conservation should be
encouraged to mainstream household energy issues in their development programmes.
102
REFERENCES
1. AFAP, (1999). Challenges for Forestry Development in ANRS.AFAP, Volume II,
BOA, Bahir Dar.
2. Araya Asfaw, (2002). The Global Energy Trends in the 21st Century. Desta et al (eds).
Energy in Ethiopia: Status, Challenges, and Prospects. Proceedings of Energy
Conference 2002,Professional Associations Joint Secretariat, Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
3. ARCS, (1999). The Amhara Regional Conservation Strategy. BoA, Bahir Dar,
Ethiopia.
4. Asress W/ Giorgis, (2002). Overview of Energy Status and Trends in Ethiopia. Desta
et al (eds). Energy in Ethiopia: Status, Challenges, and Prospects. Proceedings
of Energy Conference 2002,Professional Associations Joint Secretariat, Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia.
5. Bereket Kebede, (2000). Modern Energy and the Urban Poor in Ethiopia. African
Energy Policy Research Network. Nairobi, Kenya.
6. BoPED, (2000). Projected Population Size of Zone by Single and Five Year Age
Group. Population Department, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.
7. CESEN, (1986). Ethiopia National Energy Committee. Mian Report, CESEN-
ANSALDO/FINMECCANICA GROUP.
8. Colombo Bernardo, (1996). Resource and Development: Natural, Institutional, and
Demographic Dimensions of Development. CLARENDON PRESS, Oxford.
9. CSA, (1995). The 1994 Population and Housing Census of Ethiopia, Results for the
Amhara Region. Volume I. Part I. To IV Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
10. CSA, (2000). Welfare Monitoring Survey: Key Findings. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
11. DoPED, (2001). North Wollo Administrative Zone Socio-Economic Statistical
Bulletin. Woldia.
12. Dunkerely, Joy (1981). Energy Strategies for Developing Nations. Johns Hopkins
University Press, London.
13. ESP, (2000). Environmental Profile of North Wollo Zone. DHV Consultants BV, the
Netherlands, and DHV Ethiopia.
14. FAO, (1997). Energy and Environment Basics: Regional Wood Energy Development
Program in Asia. RWEDP, Report No 29, 2nd
Edition, Bangkok.
15. Gedion Asfaw, (2000). Assessment of Environmental Policy of Ethiopia: Zenebework
(eds). Environment and Development in Ethiopia. Proceedings of the Symposium
of the Forum of Social Science Studies, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
16. Getachew Olana, (2002). Some Socio Economic Aspects of Biomass Energy in
Ethiopia: A Review. Desta et al (eds). Energy in Ethiopia: Status, Challenges,
and Prospects. Proceedings of energy Conference 2002,Professional
Associations Joint Secretariat, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
17. HABITAT, (1993). Application of Biomass Energy Technologies. Nairobi, Kenya.
18. Haile Lul Tebicke, (2000). Major Factors and Constraint in the African Energy Sector
and Climate Change. ATAS (eds). Energy Systems, Environment and
Development. United Nations, New York.
19. Hall, D.O. (1987). Biomass: Re-generable Energy. National Research Council. King
College, London.
20. Hilawe Lakew, (1999). Assessment of Household Cooking Technologies in Ethiopia.
MoA/Gtz, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
21. Elliott, Jennifer A. (1999). An Introduction to Sustainable Development. Second
Edition. Taylor and Francis Group, London and New York.
103
22. Farinelli, Ugo (1997) Energy as a Tool for Sustainable Development for African,
Caribbean and Pacific Countries.
23. Gordon, Sheldon P. (1994). Contemporary Statistics: A Computer Approach.U.S.A.
24. Karekezi, Stephen (1997). Renewable Energy Technologies in Africa. Zed Books Ltd,
London.
25. Konemund, Trudy (2002). The Household Energy Crisis in Ethiopia: A possible way
Out. Desta et al (eds). Energy in Ethiopia: Status, Challenges, and Prospects.
Proceedings of Energy Conference 2002,Professional Associations Joint
Secretariat, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
26. Leitmann, Josef (1991). Energy Environment Linkages in the Urban Sector.
27. Lofteness, Robert L. (1978). Energy Hand Book. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company,
New York.
28. Mekonnen Kassa, (2002). Managing the Rural Energy Transition in Ethiopia. Desta et
al (eds). Energy in Ethiopia: Status, Challenges, and Prospects. Proceedings of
Energy Conference 2002,Professional Associations Joint Secretariat, Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia.
29. Miller, Alan S. (1986). Growing Power: Bio Energy for Development and
Industrialization. World Resources Institutes, A Center for Policy Research.
30. MoA, (2002). Woody Biomass Inventory and Strategic Planning Project. The Amhara
Region Woody Biomass Inventory Report. Executive Summary. Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
31. MoRD, (2002). Integrated Rural Energy Strategy. Draft Document Ethiopian Rural
Energy Development and Promotion Center. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
32. Moyu, Sam (1999). Energy Policy and Planning in Southern Africa. SAPES
BOOKS,Harare,Zimbabwe.
33. Mulugeta Adamu, (2002) . Some Options for Rural Electrification in Ethiopia. Desta
et al (eds). Energy in Ethiopia: Status, Challenges, and Prospects. Proceedings of
Energy Conference 2002,Professional Associations Joint Secretariat, Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
34. NUPI, (1995). Woldia Development Plan. Executive Summary. Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
35. NUPI, (2000). Report on Development Plan of Kobo town. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
36. Oxfam GB, (1999). Household Energy Needs Assessment in Wollo and Tigray.
MEGEN Power. P.L.C. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
37. Salome B. Misana, (1999). Deforestation in Tanzania, A developing Crisis? The
Experience of Kahama District: Social Science Research Report, Series No 13.
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
38. Shibru Tedla, (1996). Population, Biomass Fuel and Environment in Ethiopia.
MEDaC (eds). Population and Environment in Ethiopia: Proceeding of the panel
Discussion held at Ghion Hotel, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
39. Sokona, Youba (1997). Energy in Sub-Saharan Africa .Rio+5 Report.
http://www.helio-international.org//helio/anglais/reports/africa.html
HELIO International, tous droits reserves.
40. Tadelech Debele, (2001). Factors Affecting the use of Household Fuel Saving
Technologies in Urban Areas: The Case of Addis Ababa, Master Thesis Addis
Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
41. Turner, Pearce R.K. (1990). Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment.
Harvester Wheatsheaf, New York.
42. UN, (1986). Energy Statistics Yearbook, New York.
104
43. UN, (1991). Energy Systems, Environment and Development. United Nation. New
York .USA.
44. UNDP/ESMAP, (1996). Ethiopia Energy Assessment. The World Bank, Report No.
179/96, Washington, D.C, USA.
45. WB, (1996). Rural Energy and Development: Improving Energy Supplies for Two
Billion People. Washington D.C.
46. WD, (2000). From Linear Fuel Switching to Multiple Cooking Strategies: A Critique
and Alternative to the Energy Ladder Model. Elsevier Science Ltd, Great Britain.
47. World Energy Conference, (1986). Energy Terminology: A Multi-Lingual Glossary.
Second Edition.
105
Annex I: - Questioner
Interviewer Name Date of Interview Time Started
Location of Interviewed Household Name of Respondent
Kebele House No
1. Household Details 1.1. Indicate the household details of all members of the household according to the options
listed below.
Monthly income
Nam
e of
Hh
mem
ber
Sex
Ag
e
Rel
atio
n w
ith
hea
d o
f th
e H
h
Mar
tial
Sta
tus
Pla
ce o
f bir
th
Len
gth
of
stay
ing
in
Wo
ldia
Lev
el o
f
edu
cati
on
Occ
up
atio
n
Main Others
Rel
igio
n
Eth
nic
ity
No
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Sex (1) 1. Male 2. Female
Relation with head of the household (4)
1. Head 2. Spouse 3. Son/daughter
4. Mother 5. Father 6. Grand parent
7. House servant 8. Others /specify _____________
Martial status (5) 1. Under age 2. Single 3. Married
4. Divorced 5. Widowed
6. Others/specify________________________________
Place of birth (6) 1. Woldia 2. Rural with in the zone
3. Urban within the zone 4. Rural within the region
5. Urban within the region. 6. Rural other region
7. Urban other region 8. Others/specify_________
Educational level (8) 1. Illiterate 2. Read and Write
3.Primary 4. Secondary
5. Above secondary 6. Others/specify______________
Occupation (9) 1. Self-employed/ own account worker
2. Employer 3. Employee 4. Pensioned
5. Dependent 6. Unemployed
7. Others/specify________________________________
Religion (12) 1.Orthodox 2. Protestant 3. Catholic
4. Muslim 5. Traditional 6. Others/specify________
106
1.2. Major Household Spending Pattern
Expenditure Per reference Period Spending Pattern
Birr Per Week Birr Per Month Birr Per year Food and related items
Clothing and foot ware
Energy and Related Expenses
Water and telephone
Transportation
Idir
Medical
Education
Support for relatives
House rent
Others; specify
1.3. Tenure status of the housing unit
1. Owner Occupied 2. Rented from Kebele
3. Rented from PHA 4. Rented from private households
1.4. Number of rooms the housing unit has
1. Bed room only
2. One room with kitchen
3. More than one room with out kitchen
4. More than one room with kitchen
1.5. Number of households living in the housing unit___________________________
1.6. The situation of the housing unit in the town
1. Periphery 2. Center
2. FUEL USE RELATED QUESTIONS
A. GENERAL
2.1. Did you use any fuel for domestic cooking purpose?
1. Yes 2. No
2.2. If your answer for question 2.1 is yes, indicate the type of fuel you used for household
cooking
1. Biomass 2. Modern 3. Both biomass and modern fuel
2.3. If you use any type of fuel for domestic cooking indicate [by putting X marks] the type
of principal fuel you use for cooking and baking mostly employed for household
purpose.
Fuel Type
Fuel
wood BLT
Agri-
Residue Dung Charcoal Kerosene LPG Electricity
Others/
specify Endues
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Injera Baking
Wot
Coffee
Tea
Others/ Specify
107
2.4. Why you prefer the above mentioned fuel as the principal source of energy [Indicate
your answer by putting X mark]
Injera Baking Wot Coffee Tea Others/ Specify
1. Price reduction
2. It's multiple uses
3. Reliable supply
4. Freely supplied
5. Easy to manage
6. Others/ Specify
2.5. Indicate the type of domestic appliances used in the household for Injera baking.
1. Didn’t bake Injera
2. Open fire Injera Mitad
3. Enclosed traditional Injera Mitad
4. Mirte Injera Mitad
5. Electric Mitad
6. Others/Specify_________________________________________________
2.6. Indicate the type of domestic appliances used in the household for cooking and boiling.
1. Open fire with metal tripod, stone/clay seat
2. Metal charcoal stove
3. Lakech charcoal
4. Kerosene stove
5. LPG stove
6. Others/ Specify ________________________________________________
2.7. If you have more than one baking and cooking appliances, what is the reason?
1. To cope with any fuel failure
2. To cope with any technical failure
3. To cope with any fuel price increment
4. Others/ specify_________________________________________________
2.8. If you use open fire for baking and other cooking, what are the main problems?
1. Consumes too much fuel
2. It is hot while baking
3. Exposure to accidental burns
4. Too smoky
5. Others/ specify_________________________________________________
2.9. Did you bake Injera in your home?
1. Yes 2. No
2.10. If your answer for question 2.9 is yes.
2.10.1. Where do you bake Injera?
1. Separate kitchen
2. Shared kitchen
3. In the living room
4. Open air
5. Others/ Specify ________________________________________________
2.10.2. How often do you bake Injera per week?
_________________________________________(Write number of times)
2.10.3. How many "Injera" do you bake per session?
_________________________________________(Write number of times)
108
2.10.4. Do you bake "Injera" for sale?
1. Yes 2. No
2.10.5. If your answer for question 2.10.4 is yes, how regularly do you bake "Injera"
for sale?
1. Always 2. Sometimes
2.10.6. If you bake "Injera" for sale, how many "Injera" do you sell per week?
___________________ Injera.
2.10.7. Have you experienced "Injera" shortage
1. Yes 2. No
2.10.8. When "Injera" shortage happened, how do you cope with?
1. Buy Injera
2. Borrowed Injera from neighbors
3. Change the feeding habit
4. Did nothing
5. Others/ Specify __________________________________________
2.11. The frequency of other cooking in the household? Reference period Wot Coffee Tea Others/ Specify
Per Day
Per Week
Per Month
2.12. How much do you spent for buying fuel?
Fuel
wood BLT
Agro-
Residues Dung Charcoal Kerosene Electric LPG
Others
/specify Reference
Period 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Per Day
Per Week
Per month
Per Year
B. SPECIFIC FUEL RELATED QUESTIONS B.1. BIOMASS FUEL
3.1. How do you usually obtain your biomass fuel supplies?
1. Purchased
2. Collected
3. Purchased and collected
4. Others/ Specify __________________________________________
3.2. Indicate the average amount of biomass fuel the household purchased and the fee pay
for the fuel per month in Birr C a r r i e r
Women Load Man Load Donkey Load Kuntal Others / specify
Fuel Type
Qu
anti
ty
Bir
r
Qu
anti
ty
Bir
r
Qu
anti
ty
Bir
r
Qu
anti
ty
Bir
r
Qu
anti
ty
Bir
r
Fuel Wood
BLT
Dung
Agro-Residues
Charcoal
Others/ specify
109
3.3. Indicate the amount of biomass fuel collected by the household per month
C a r r i e r Fuel Type
Women Load Man Load Donkey Load Kuntal Others / specify
Fuel Wood
BLT
Dung
Agro-Residues
Charcoal
Others/ specify
3.4. Is there specific season that you experience biomass fuel shortage?
1. Yes 2. No
3.5. If the answer for question 3.4 is yes, during which part of the year biomass fuels
scarce mostly happen?
1. June to September 2. October to January 3. February to May
3.6. How to mitigate the seasonal biomass fuel supply scarcity
1. Do nothing
2. Substitute with other fuels
3. Conserve fuel use
4. Stock on fuel
5. Stop fuel using
6. Decrease frequency of baking and cooking
7. Others/specify______________________________________________
3.7. Do you feel fuel wood supply is a problem in Woldia?
1. Yes 2. No 3. No idea
3.8. If your answer for question 3.7 is yes, how do you explain the seriousness of the
problem?
1. Supply decreases
2. The price increases
3. Supply of crop-residue and dung increase
4. Others/Specify _____________________________________________
B.2. KEROSENE
3.9. Do you use kerosene for household cooking?
1. Yes 2. No
3.10. If your answer for question3.9 is no, why you didn't use it?
1. Health problem
2. I don't have kerosene stove
3. It is more expensive
4. Others/ specify______________________________________________
3.11. If you use kerosene for domestic cooking purpose, how do you obtain it?
1. Purchased from fuel station
2. Purchased from retailers
3. Purchased from fuel station and retailers
4. Others/Specify _____________________________________________
110
3.12. If you purchased from fuel station, why you prefer it?
1. Price reduction 2. Availability 3. Quality 4. Purchased in large quantity 5. Other/specify_______________________________________________
3.13. If you purchased from retailers, why you prefer it?
1. Minimum requirement imposed by fuel stations
2. Purchase as we demanded
3. Available at any time of the day
4. Others / specify___________________________________________
3.14. Indicate the amount of kerosene per month you purchased by source in Birr?
S o u r c e
Fuel station Retailers Others/specify Reference period
Quantity Unit
price Quantity
Unit
price Quantity
Unit
price
Litter
Bottle
Others/specify
3.15. The availability of kerosene from the fuel stations in Woldia is
1. Reliable 2. Not reliable
B.3. ELECTRICITY
3.16. Do you have electric meter?
1. Yes 2. No
3.17. Your household electricity meter connection is
1. Privately owned 2. By connection 3. No connection
3.18. If your answer for question 3.17 is privately owned
3.18.1. For what purpose do you use the electric
1. For lighting
2. For Injera baking
3. For cooking
4. Others/specify______________________________________________
3.18.2. If you use electric for Injera baking, did you use only electric for Injera
baking?
1. Yes 2. No
3.18.3. If your answer for question 3.18.2 is yes, why do you prefer it?
1. Price reduction
2. Unreliable supply of fuel wood
3. The only available fuel source for Injera baking
4. Time saving
5. Others/specify______________________________________________
3.18.4. Did you sell or transfer the electric to other households?
1. Yes 2. No
3.18.5. If your answer for question number 3.18.4 is yes, on what basis do you share
the electric service?
1. With payment
2. With out payment
3. Other/ specify ______________________________________________
111
3.18.6. If your answer for question3.18.5 is with payment, how much you receive for
the service: ____________________ Birr per month.
3.18.7. If you transfer the electric for other households, for what purpose do you
allowed the electric service?
1. For lighting
2. For Injera baking
3. For cooking
4. Other/ specify ______________________________________________
3.18.8. If your answer for question 3.18.7 is only for lighting, why you restrict it?
1. Difficult to rate the fee
2. Difficult to limit their use
3. Due to frequent disagreement with the user
4. User choice
5. Others/specify______________________________________________
3.19. If you don't have privately owned electric meter
3.19.1. Why you fail to have it?
1. Shortage of money
2. I don't have permanent residential place
3. Do you to lengthy bureaucracy of EEPCO
4. Others/specify___________________________________________
3.19.2. For what purpose do you use the electric?
1. For Lighting
2. For Injera baking
3. For cooking
4. Others/ Specify __________________________________________
3.19.3. Did you pay for the electric services?
1. Yes 2. No
3.19.4. If your answer for question 3.20.3 is yes, how much you pay for electricity?
____________________________________ Birr per month.
3.19.5. Do you feel that the absence of privately owned electric meter in your
household affects diversified use of electric as you wish to do?
1. Yes 2. No
3.19.6. If your answer for question 3.19.5 is yes, what could be the reason for the
limitation?
1. Restriction imposed by electric meter owner
2. Lack of money
3. Lack of appliances related to other end use
4. Electricity is more expensive than other fuel sources
5. Others/specify______________________________________________
3.20. Indicate the power the appliances you use and the usage hours per the reference period
in line with the purpose you use the electric Usage hours per
Purposes Power (Watt) Quantity
In number Day Week Month Year
112
3.21. If you ever seen any electric tariff increment, has the increment in electric charge
affected your electric usage pattern?
1. Yes 2. No
3.22. If your answer for question 3.21 is yes, what measure do you take to cope up?
1. Reduced Consumption
2. Substitute with cheaper fuel
3. Adopt use of multiple fuel sources
4. Others/Specify ________________________________________________
3.23. Fuel substitution due to electric tariff increment [indicate by putting X marks].
End Uses Fuel
wood BLT
Agro-
Residues Dung Charcoal Kerosene Electric LPG
Others
/specify
Baking
Cooking
Time Finished_________________
Thank you
113
Annex II: - Biomass Fuel Weight Survey Format The following format was employed to determine the average weight of biomass fuels
supplied to Woldia town.
Fuel Sources Distance
No
Fuel
Type by
Carriers
Sales
Price
in
Birr
Weight
in Kg Region Zone Woreda Kebele Gott
In
Km
In
Hours
Name of the Interviewer------------------------Date--------Month---------Year----------
Annex III: -Checklists for Key Informants and Focus Group Discussion
The following checklist were used with questions to guide in the informal interviews and
group discussions that held with adult and elderly men and women, professionals from
different governmental and non governmental organizations, improved stove producers,
zonal and municipal officials.
1. Is household energy a problem in Woldia town, in what way?
2. What are the major problems?
3. What are the major sources of energy used in the area to meet daily basic energy
requirements?
4. Are these fuels expensive, are they getting scarce, what was the situation long
ago-say 10 years back?
5. How does the availability and price compare to 10 years ago in the area?
6. Does fuel availability and/or price vary by season?
7. Generally how do people cope with household energy problems both cooking and
baking?
8. Do you think people could shift more and more to commercial fuels such as
kerosene and electricity for cooking and baking?
9. What are the major constraints or possible new avenues for such shift?
10. Is a credit facility available, which organization is extending credit?
11. What intervention measures were tried to alleviate household energy problems?
12. What intervention measures are planned (or are possible) to remedy the household
energy problem?
13. Patterns and adoption of traditional enclosed and improved stoves and major
problems related to their use
114
14. Are credit facilities willing to extend credit for people willing to purchase
improved stoves?
15. What are the major constraints to have access and use electric utilities for
household cooking and baking?
16. What are the major problems to use kerosene for household cooking?
Annex IV: -Biomass Fuel Weight Survey Result and Conversion Factors
Annex V: -Conversion Factor Calorific values (Energy Contents) of Domestic
Fuels Sources (MJ/Kg)
Calorific values (Energy Contents) of Domestic Fuels Sources (MJ/Kg)
Fuel Type Calorific Value
Wood 17.5 MJ/Kg
BLT 15.0 MJ/Kg
Cow Dung 12 MJ/Kg
Agricultural Residua 15 MJ/Kg
Charcoal 29 MJ/Kg
Kerosene 44 MJ/Kg
Weight
1 Kwh 3.6 MJ
1 Kwh 1000Watthours
Source: - CEINEMA (1991), Kristoferson(1991), Helawi(1999);
Cited in Tadelech (2001)
Women Load Man Load Donkey Sack Weight in Kg Weight in Kg Weight in Kg Weight in Kg
Co
un
t
Tota
l
Av
erag
e
Co
un
t
Tota
l
Av
erag
e
Co
un
t
Tota
l
Av
erag
e
Co
un
t
Tota
l
Av
erag
e
Fuel Wood 38 1308 34.42 43 989 23.00 7 156 22.29 - - - Charcoal - - - - - - - - - 33 822 24.90 BLT 6 137 22.80 4 82 20.50 - - - - - - Dung - - - - - - - - - 30 402 13.40 Crop
Residue 13 302 23.23 6 97 16.20 - - - - - -
115
Annex VI: -Conversion Factor for Electric3
� Fuel consumption per Injera is 0.24 kw
� Fuel cost per Injera is Birr 0.08
� Number of Injera baked using electric Mitad by the two households is 6804
� Total electric used for Injera baking is: -
680 X 0.24kwh X 3.6MJ = 587.5 MJ
� Total electrical energy expenditure made for Injera baking is: -
680 X 0.08 Birr = Birr 54.40
Annex VII: - Descriptive Statistics: Sample household monthly expenditure
made for household cooking in Birr, 2003.
Fuel Type N Range Min Max Sum Mean Std. Dev
Total Hh Expenditure5 117 2075 49.0 2124.0 44782.00 382.75 327.10
Total Fuel Expenditure 120 236 0 236 8683.33 72.36 49.79
Total For Cooking Purpose Only 120 205 0 205 7265.23 60.54 39.11
Total Biomass Fuel 120 193 0 193 6027.83 50.23 30.95
Fuel Wood 120 168 0 168 3140.00 26.17 20.28
Charcoal 120 75 0 75 2710.00 22.58 16.06
BLT 120 10 0 10 33.33 0.28 1.55
Crop Residue 120 12 0 12 39.00 0.33 1.69
Dung 120 36 0 36 105.50 0.88 3.73
All Modern Fuel 120 150 0 150 2655.50 22.13 27.18
Modern Fuel For Cooking Only 120 75.6 0 75.6 1237.40 10.31 14.24
Kerosene 120 50 0 50 1183.00 9.86 12.88
Electric For Cooking Only 120 28.8 0 28.8 54.40 0.45 3.50
All Electric 120 120 0 120 1472.50 12.27 18.38
Annex VIII: - Descriptive Statistics: Sample households’ monthly biomass
fuel consumption in Kg for household cooking, 2003.
Fuel Type N Range Minimum Maximum Sum Mean Std. Devi.
Fuel Wood 120 482.6 0 482.6 9898.1 82.5 69.2
Charcoal 120 74.9 0 74.9 2626.9 21.9 17.4
BLT 120 662.4 0 662.4 1119.4 9.3 61.4
Dung 120 160.8 0 160.8 951.4 7.9 22.1
Crop Residua 120 44.2 0 44.2 181 1.5 6.5
3 Fuel cost and fuel consumption per Injera is adopted from Hilawi (1999).
4 Number of Injera baked by electric Mitad derived from own survey.
5 Total household expenditure made for all purposes
116
Annex IX: -Descriptive Statistics: Sample households’ monthly fuel
Consumption in MJ for household cooking, 2003.
Fuel Type N Range Minimum Maximum Sum Mean Std. Devi.
Total Energy 120 11259.0 4.4 11263.4 306956.0 2558.0 1804.6
All Biomass Fuels 120 11263.4 0.0 11263.4 280320.4 2336.0 1693.5
Fuel Wood 120 8446.0 0.0 8446.0 173216.6 1443.5 1211.0
Charcoal 120 2172.4 0.0 2172.4 76180.7 634.8 504.5
BLT 120 9936.0 0.0 9936.0 16791.6 139.9 920.6
Crop Residua 120 662.3 0.0 662.3 2714.7 22.6 97.3
Dung 120 1929.6 0.0 1929.6 11416.8 95.1 265.7
Total Modern Energy 120 1376.5 0.0 1376.5 26635.5 222.0 299.9
Electric 120 311.0 0.0 311.0 587.5 4.9 37.8
Kerosene 120 1100.0 0.0 1100.0 26048.0 217.1 287.5
Annex X: -Descriptive Statistics Expenditure of only biomass and multiple fuel
users of sample households,2003.
Fuel Type N Range Min. Max. Sum Mean Std. Devi.
% of Total
N
% of Total
Sum
Biomass 57 137 0 137 2313.3 40.6 26.5 47.9 31.9
Modern and Biomass 62 182 23 205 4939.9 79.7 39.4 52.1 68.1
Total 119 205 0 205 7253.2 61.0 39.0 100.0 100.0
117
Signed Declaration
This thesis is my original work, has not been presented for a degree in any other
university and all sources of material used for the study are duly acknowledged.
Worku Gashaw W/Amanuel
_______________________________
Addis Ababa University
This thesis has been submitted for examination with my approval as a University
Advisor.
NAME: - Professor Kashi.N.Singh
SIGNATURE: - ____________________
DATE OF APPROVAL: - ____________________