Cooking fuel in intelligent settlements

Ike Señeres

THE Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) of the United Nations includes fuel as one of the indicators of being in a state of poverty. I have proposed “Facets” as an acronym for all he six indicators, meaning Floor, Assets, Cooking Fuel, Electricity, Toilets and Safe Water. The six indicators measure the living standards of people all over the world. The other four indicators pertain to health (child mortality and nutrition) and education (years of schooling and school attendance. If a household is deprived of a third of the ten indicators, it would be considered “MPI poor”. This is a different approach compared to measuring the state of poverty by way of a household’s capability to afford the so-called “imaginary basket of goods”.

As it is supposed to be a household is considered deprived of the cooking fuel indicator if it still cooks with dung, wood or charcoal. A household is considered deprived of the electricity indicator if it has no electricity. It appears however that if a household has electricity and it cooks with a regular electric stove or an electric induction stove, then it is not deprived of the cooking fuel indicator. It is also implied that if a household already cooks with any type of gas such as Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG), kerosene or biogas, then it is not considered deprived of the cooking fuel indicator. The same is true if a household already cooks with a solar powered stove or a gasifier stove, although the latter is debatable because it uses woodchips and other cellulosic materials.

Based on the usual research practices, the deprivation of the cooking fuel is measured only at the household level and not at the community level. According to these same practices however, there is no prohibition against the provision of cooking fuels by way of communal facilities. What that means is that if there is a communal facility where household members could cook without using dung, wood or charcoal, then their households would no longer be considered deprived of the cooking fuel indicator. That would therefore create an opportunity for communal solutions such as centralized solar panels or centralized biogas system to be used, or perhaps even a centrally pipelined LPG installation. I think that is how the availability of cooking fuel in an intelligent settlement should be measured, when it is already available at the communal level instead of the household level.

Spending about 800 pesos for an LPG canister is no big deal for the rich, but it’s a big burden for poor households. If they could not afford LPG, their other option is dung, wood or charcoal and that would mean that they are already deprived of cooking fuels. Using wood or firewood is actually a problem because it could lead to the illegal cutting of trees. Charcoal may not cause a problem if the wood supply is taken from commercial forests, but there is really no way to tell, and therefore it could also lead to the illegal cutting of trees. Very few people could be using dung, but if they would, it could be a carrier of diseases and could lead to fly or vermin infestation. Even if kerosene stoves are acceptable, it could also cause health problems.

The story about our failure to use biogas is similar to our failure to use alcogas. We have become so spoiled rotten in using LPG and gasoline, and so we completely ignored the savings that we could have generated from home grown alternatives. Unknown to most of us however, using biogas is not only good for the environment; it is also good for the economy. Using biogas would enable us to dispose of our organic wastes (including kitchen wastes) methodically, in such a way that it would even improve our sanitation standards. Kitchen wastes and market wastes would actually fill up our landfills unnecessarily with organic matter that would add to uncontrolled methane gas production. Alcogas is another story, because we could have productively used farm and factory wastes from the sugar production processes.

In theory, biogas could be produced in single detached homes or in midrise and high rise residential or mixed use buildings. Of course, it could also be pipelined vertically, but that would require underground diggings. For a start however, it might be a good idea to put up a communal biogas kitchen in urban poor communities where many people could either not afford to buy LPG or would not have access to firewood. The people could either cook their own meals there for a small fee, or buy cooked food from a cafeteria. Either way, a local cooperative could own the communal kitchen or even the vertical pipelined systems if these are found to be viable. That way, the people could be earning money while they are saving money.

The choice between producing compost fertilizers or biogas in a community setting is actually a function of supply and demand, highly influenced by selling prices. Both could actually be produced, if there is a surplus of raw materials. In other words, that could be a business decision on the part of the cooperatives. In the case of the midrise or high rise buildings, the homeowners association could take the place of the cooperatives; the same is true for village associations. One disadvantage of producing compost fertilizers is that the buyers still have to be found outside the communities or buildings, while the biogas would already have a ready market within the communities or buildings.

In reality, methane gas production in landfills could actually be an opportunity instead of a problem, provided of course it is properly tapped. Otherwise, it is really a problem if the methane gas escapes into the air and would cause air pollution. As we all know, the problem is not only local but is also global, because the gas goes up into the atmosphere and causes more damage to the ozone layer. Recently, the Philippines gained another negative distinction of being one of the top countries in Asia that contributes heavily to regional air pollution. We might be able to build some intelligent settlements here and there that are fuel independent, but not unless we do that in most places, we will be far from achieving our clean air goals.

E-mail: bantaygobyerno-subscribe@yahoogroups.com