Quantifying the use of firewood as a source of energy in North West Province : a case study for Matlwang

Abstract

The aim of the current study was to quantify the use of firewood as a source of energy in Matlwang, a small township in the North West Province of South Africa. A mixed method was used to collect data for the study. The rationale for adopting it was to garner unique perspectives on the dynamics of solid-fuel usage as well as emissions produced from a predominantly wood-burning township. Methods for sourcing the required data included face-to-face interviews with one member from each of 50 households, structured questionnaires, and observations. The questionnaires were administered to fifty households that were selected randomly in the township. In addition to the interviews and questionnaires, during the summer and winter of 2017, twenty households were issued scales to weigh the firewood they burnt daily. These data provided the consumption of firewood in the township as well as formed the basis for calculations of emissions during summer and winter. The total household and township emissions estimates for CO2, CO, NO and CH4 have been calculated. Of the households in the township, 86 % used firewood for cooking and heating. The remaining 14 % used electricity, gas (LPG) or paraffin. The households use firewood in both seasons as their only source of primary energy. The results of this study show that the unemployment rate, poverty, culture, age, lack of access to electricity and readily available firewood are reasons the households continue to use firewood as a source of energy. About 64 % of households in the township stated that they used firewood because of poverty. Most households in the township reported that they did not have jobs, which meant they could only afford to collect or buy firewood because it is cheaper than purchasing electricity, paraffin, and LPG. The majority of households advised that collecting firewood is convenient since it does not require money for either the wood or transportation to get it back to the house. Households that are unable to collect their own wood purchase the wood from vendors who collect it. A “load” of wood (namely, one “donkey cart” of approximately 50 kg) is sold to households for between ZAR 120 and ZAR200, depending on the type/quality of wood purchased. The households indicated that they had three preferred sites from which they collected firewood, namely, Kgapamadi, Kgabaesetswe and Tshopane hills. Kgapamadi was the preferred site for the households and vendors interviewed. The region surrounding Matlwang is clearly at risk of significant environmental damage as a result of vegetation clearing. This is exacerbated by the fact the three preferred types of wood collected were all indigenous species: “Mooka”, “Moumo” and “Mmilo”. In addition to the

economic reasons for burning firewood, studies have indicated that practising culture and tradition may also influence the high consumption of firewood (Andreae et al., 1996). All the households in the township burnt wood three times daily: in the morning (04:00 to 10:00), afternoon (12:00 to 16:00) and evening (18:00 to 22:00). The entire township burns on average 399 kg of firewood.day-1 in summer and 702 kg.day-1 in winter. Most households stated that they preferred using firewood because it is affordable (inexpensive) and readily accessible. The households also said that using firewood gives them options to do more than one household activity at the same time, such as cooking, boiling water and heating their houses. The households in the township of Matlwang use indoor, hand-built stoves with attached chimneys to provide for both cooking and heating purposes. However, some houses in the township are poorly ventilated. As a consequence, when stoves burn there is a danger of smoke inhalation. The households also use “mbaula”/“imbawula” (brazier) stoves for cooking and heating. The households reported an mbaula is inexpensive to use and it is economical on firewood as it does not require a lot of firewood when cooking. They also stated that an mbaula neither produces nor spreads too many smoke emissions in the house as flames are channelled in one direction when it burns. Marufu et al. (1997) reported that an mbaula can save up to 60 % of firewood compared with a traditional three-stone fire. An mbaula is easy to move if the weather changes and it does not shed ashes when moved. Many households (28 %) in the township reported that their homes are not electrified. As a result, they do not have access to electricity. The findings of the survey indicated that the lack and cost of electricity (particularly during winter) forced about 86% of the villagers to rely on a mix of energy sources. Households without electricity used cow dung, paraffin and gas to replace firewood and electricity during winter and occasionally in summer. The use of multiple energy sources for multiple purposes (“stacking”) is not a short transition phase but can last for decades, as shown in South Africa, Mexico and China (Masera et al., 2015). Since most rural regions in South Africa cannot afford electricity, they lack a reliable power source. Heating and cooking are the two main activities that require energy consumption. Activities like cleaning, sanitation, communication and entertainment account for a small proportion of the total energy demand of township households. The smoke generated by solid fuels (burning wood) for domestic heating can have significant impacts on both indoor and outdoor air quality, with concomitant associated health and

environmental concerns. In conclusion, the findings indicate that the households utilise approximately 20 (± 2.8) kg wood.household-1.day-1 (summer) and 35 (± 7.1) kg wood.household-1.day-1 (winter) or 4.8 (± 2.4)kg wood.person-1.day-1 (summer) and 7.8 (± 2.9) kg wood.person-1.day-1 (winter). The resulting CO2, CO, NO and CH4 emissions for the township are respectively: 894 (± 328), 85 (± 31), 1 (± 0.3) and 3 (± 1) Mt.annum-1. Finally, the per caput CO2 emissions reported for the township were found to be substantially less than the national per caput CO2 emissions for South Africa.