Abstract
There is concern over the environmental impact of charcoal use for cooking in urban areas; however, studies have mainly been limited to Africa and South Asia. This investigation aimed to evaluate woodfuel consumption rates and patterns in an urban area in Yedashe Township, Myanmar and compared them with results from a rural area in the same township. From interviews with 66 urban households, it was evident that firewood and charcoal consumption rates in the urban area were about one-third and one-fourth, respectively, of those in the rural area. These low consumption rates were because of multiple-fuel use (mainly woodfuel and electricity) in the urban area in contrast to single-fuel use in the rural area. We estimated the forest area required to meet woodfuel demand of the whole township to be 3738 ha; that could decrease by almost 40% (1592 ha) if the single-fuel use in the rural area switched to the multiple-fuel methods used in the urban area. This study confirms that urbanization with an “energy stack” in multiple-fuel use, rather than an “energy ladder” from firewood to charcoal, could largely reduce the environmental impact on forests.
Highlights
Woodfuel remains a dominant energy source in the developing world in both rural and urban areas
We examine the effects of urbanization on woodfuel use and its impact on forests
We considered source, size, and species of trees that were used for making firewood and charcoal
Summary
Woodfuel remains a dominant energy source in the developing world in both rural and urban areas. A common model to describe the household fuel choices in developing countries is the “energy ladder”, where primitive fuels (such as firewood and agricultural wastes) are replaced by transition fuels (such as charcoal and kerosene) and advanced fuels (such as electricity and liquefied petroleum gas) in the processes of urbanization [3]. Studies showed that the energy transition does not occur as a series of simple, discrete steps as the “energy ladder” implies; instead, “energy stack” is more common, where with increasing income, households adopt new fuels and technologies that serve as partial rather than perfect substitutes for more traditional ones [3]. Comparisons of household energy consumption between rural and urban areas would help understand the energy transition patterns and their environmental impacts
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
