Opportunities, challenges and the way forward for biomass briquettes in Tanzania

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3516598/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Opportunities, challenges and the way forward for biomass briquettes in Tanzania

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3516598/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

The reported study highlights the potential for biomass briquettes as a cleaner and more sustainable alternative to traditional fuels like firewood and charcoal in Tanzania. Focus group discussions and key informant meetings were conducted, involving stakeholders from 16 regions of Tanzania's mainland. Rating scales and SWOT analysis were used to analyze the collected information. Our analysis showed that briquette technology can contribute to reducing deforestation, climate change mitigation, and employment generation. However, it also identified various challenges like market incompetency, limited access to technology, community misconceptions about briquettes, and a lack of political support. To mitigate these challenges and promote the briquette sector in Tanzania, the study suggests various interventions, particularly providing technical training and resources to accelerate production and quality assurance and engaging with policymakers to advocate for supportive policies and incentives. Additionally, developing effective marketing and distribution strategies. In conclusion, the study indicates that Tanzania has the potential to advance the biomass briquette sector, which has positive social, ecological and economic impacts. However, addressing these challenges and realizing their potential benefits will require a collaborative and multifaceted approach involving various stakeholders, like government agencies, researchers, development partners, NGOs, and local communities.

Conservation

livelihood

rural

development

technology

Briquettes are compressed blocks made from biomass, charcoal or coal that are typically used to meet energy demands in households and industries. The materials used for making briquettes vary significantly depending on their intended use and local availability (Ghaffar et al., 2015). In many countries of sub-Saharan Africa, feedstocks for briquette making are generated partly from agricultural wastes and partly from forest by-products (Akogun et al., 2022; Morales-Máximo et al., 2022). Salvaging them for this purpose prevents them from unnecessary burning or burying. By harnessing the potential of these underutilized biomass resources, a win-win solution can be developed for both environmental conservation and community development (Shuma and Madyira, 2017).

The advantages of briquettes over conventional fossil fuels make them competitive and increasingly attractive as an alternative source of energy. Briquettes from biomass feedstocks are considered renewable, since the raw materials from forestry or agriculture can be replenished (Shuma and Madyira, 2017). Environmentally, the combustion of biomass briquettes emits fewer greenhouse gases and pollutants, making them useful in combating climate change (Mokaya et al., 2020). High energy density in briquettes makes them efficient in terms of controlled combustion, energy yield and cost (Akogun et al., 2022). Because of their consistent shape, size and weight, briquettes can be easily transported and stored (Kajumba et al., 2022). Additonally, production of briquettes can generate job opportunities, especially in rural areas where the supply of feedstocks and demand for alternative energy are higher (Yustas et al., 2022).

Despite the benefits above, the uptake of briquette technology is less developed in many African countries, including Tanzania. Conventional charcoal and firewood are still the main sources of cooking energy, contributing about 80% of domestic energy consumption (Doggart et al., 2020). Large cities like Dar es Salaam are consumption hotspots for charcoal (Felix and Gheewala, 2011; Olabisi et al., 2019) and contribute to the annual loss of 470,000 ha of forest (Gizachew et al., 2020).

Ongoing demand for charcoal and firewood in many parts of Tanzania is a common scenario (Felix and Gheewala, 2011). To address this issue and achieve a transition towards more sustainable and cleaner energy sources, the country needs to promote the use of briquettes as a commendable option. However, it is essential to gather detailed information about the suitability, feasibility, and acceptability of briquette technology to speed up its adoption and scaling-up.

The aim of the presented study was to explore the existing opportunities and challenges that face the briquette sector in Tanzania. Additionally, to identify possible interventions for its future sustainability and achieve the study objective, the following are key study questions:

What is the current structure of the briquette value chain in Tanzania?

What are the existing opportunities to advance the briquette sector in Tanzania?

What are the challenges that underlie the slow progress of the briquette sector in Tanzania?

What interventions can be deployed to advance the briquette sector in Tanzania?

Study area

Figure 1: Map of Tanzania showing locations of sampling area

The meetings were organized in six strategic locations (Fig. 1). Finally, representatives came from 16 regions, namely, Arusha, Kilimanjaro, Dar es Salaam Coastal, Mtwara, Lindi, Ruvuma, Iringa and Njombe, Tabora, Simiyu, Kigoma and Singida, and Shinyanga, Kagera, Mwanza, Geita, and Mara. These regions have different human population sizes, major sources of income, agricultural systems, climatic conditions and vegetation types (NBS, 2012).

Methods

Workshop participants were identified through consultation with Tanzania Forest Services (TFS), Tanzania Industrial Research and Development Organization (TIRDO), Commission of Science and Technology (COSTECH) and Small Industries Development Organization (SIDO). Basic information about their operation, like types of briquettes produced, types of feedstock used, position in the value chain, scale of enterprises, physical location, and duration in the business, was recorded.

Information about the opportunities and challenges of briquette production was gathered through focus group discussions (FGDs), key informant interviews (KI), and field visits. FGD meetings aimed to identify day-to-day barriers that affect the production and quality of briquettes. The meetings lasted between 2 and 3 hours and were attended by 10 to 15 participants, comprised of briquette producers and cookstove makers. Key informant interviews involved one-on-one consultations with selected groups of experts like conservation officers, district authorities, Tanzania Forest Services, and NGOs. Others were scientists from higher learning and research institutions. The purpose of the KI meetings was to determine the contribution of the briquette sector to conservation and livelihood. All respondents were assured about confidentiality of their contributions and identities.

Checklists of questions were used to guide discussions during FGD and KI meetings. Additionally, field visits were conducted to observe the status of the operating conditions of briquette factories. This includes the types and quality of processing machines, the handling of raw materials, storage facilities, the type of power used, and the distance from the market. Photos and short videos were documented.

To facilitate decision-making and quantify information during FDG, a rating scale ranging from 1 to 3 was applied. Whereby, 1 = “less agreed” when less than 40% of participants agreed. 2 = “moderately agreed” when 40–59% of participants agreed. 3 = “strongly agreed” when 60–100% of participants agreed. Information about opportunities, challenges and suggestions for advancing the briquette industry in Tanzania was extracted from FGD and KI by using SWOT analysis (strength, Weakness, Opportunities and threats).

3.1 Briquette value chain, stakeholders and existing technologies

The participants in FGD were able to provide a clear description of the existing structural composition of the briquette value chain in Tanzania. Based on their descriptions, it was noted that the value chain was extensive and involved many stages of activity (Fig. 2). The overall structure involves two sets of complementing activities, the main value chain and supporting services. However, supplementary information from key informants elaborated that the current value chain has a lower diversity of actors. About 90% of briquette producers are involved in multiple activities within the value chain, leading to a lack of specialization.

Figure 2. Briquette technology value chain in Tanzania (remove training part)

Raw materials were mainly collected by producers themselves, mainly from crop waste and timber factories. In some regions, youth and women are employed to supply raw materials to briquette factories. However, no specialized supplier of raw materials was reported to exist across all surveyed regions.

About 95% of participants reported using local methods for processing raw materials. These involved sun-drying for moisture removal, while shredding was done manually by using bush-knives. Additionally, about 80% of briquette producers used charcoal dust collected from charcoal vendors.

A significant contribution to briquette production (90%) involved small electrically powered motors (2 hp to 5 hp), which were fabricated locally. The production output of this machine was highly variable, ranging from 100kg to, 2000kg per day. On the other hand, 10% of women participants reported using their hands to fabricate briquettes from a mixture of clay and charcoal dust. Between 150 and 200 briquettes were produced by one woman per day.

Diverse uses of briquettes were reported. About 70% of the charcoal briquettes produced were supplied to poultry farmers, as these types of briquettes tend to release heat energy slowly but for a long time. Additionally, 60% of customers were schools and refugee camps that preferred uncarbonized biomass briquettes.

According to key informants, only a few records exist about the contribution of the research and development component (R&D) within the briquette value chain in Tanzania. In the early 1970s, CARMATEC and TEMDO implemented the World Bank Energy 1 Project, whose goal was to promote locally produced briquettes as a potential alternative to charcoal. Some NGOs, like Kilimanjaro Development and Training Institute (KIDTI) in Moshi and ARTEnergy in Dar es Salaam, offered training to hundreds of youth and women in early 1990s. Recently, the Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute (TAWIRI) innovated the use of invasive plants as raw materials for biomass briquettes (Pers.comm, 2022).

3.2 Opportunities for briquette production in Tanzania

Briquette production in Tanzania presents various opportunities due to the country's abundant biomass resources and variable energy needs. One key informant reported that there is a positive correlation between the growth of the human population and increased energy demands in communities. Also, due to the underdevelopment of other forms of clean cooking energy in Tanzania, the briquette market is likely to be superior in the near future (Pers. Comm).

Furthermore, nearly 70% of FDG participants reported an abundance of crop waste within their regions, especially after harvest. However, the proportion of responses was relatively lower (45%) for participants who came from large cities, particularly Dar es Salaam and Arusha. Likewise, another key informant from one of the tree plantations reported massive accumulations of saw dust in timber processing factories in Iringa region (pers.comm).

Moreover, approximately 90% of meeting participants indicated consciousness that using briquettes for cooking can rescue women and girls from health risks related to indoor air pollution. Other reported risks included vulnerability to back and neck injuries related to carrying heavy loads of firewood collected from distant locations.

Opportunity for job creation was strongly agreed (> 90%) by almost all FDG participants. A key informant who represented stove-makers in the Tabora region informed that her workshop has employed more than 50 youth in the last three years.

The easy adoption of briquette technology in rural areas was agreed upon by 80% of participants. Based on our further discussion with women participants in FDG, it was noted that using briquettes as a source of cooking energy does not demand significant changes in handling and cooking behavior. Also, upgrading to briquettes from the traditional sources of energy does not require the purchase of a new stove.

3.3 Challenges facing briquette production in Tanzania

3.3.1 Temporal variation on supply of raw materials

The study found that briquette industry in Tanzania faces several challenges that slow down its growth and sustainability. A lack of consistent supply of feedstock was reported by more than 70% of FDG meetings participants in all surveyed regions. It was further elaborated by key informant from Tanzania Forest Services (TFS) that, the availability of crop wastes often decreased during the dry season since the same resource were highly demanded to feed livestock (Pers.com, 2022).

However, only coal-dust from Ruvuma region (Fig. 1) was reported being a abundant perennial feedstock. Because of its location, the transport cost was perceived to be too high to transport coal to other regions. Notably, out of 120 participants in FGD, only a small proportion (0.05%) were involved in production of coal briquettes.

3.3.2 Lack of improved technology

Inadequate briquette-making technology and poor working facilities were another significant challenge for many briquette producers. A community leader from Masasi District informed me that most operations, including drying and processing, were conducted in the houses' backyards. Briquettes were processed on locally fabricated machines with low output, ranging between 500kg and 1 tonne a day. Moreover, the carbonization of biomass was conducted in old metal drums, leading to a high ash content in the briquettes. The reported deficiencies were strongly related to a lack of formal training about briquette technology. Nearly 90% of all meeting participants revealed that they learned about briquette making from their experienced colleagues.

3.3.3 High investment costs

It was further noted that between 75% and 90% of FDG participants complained about high costs associated with the procurement of production equipment, paying power bills and transportation. The minimum investment cost for a small production unit was reported to range between USD 6,500 and USD 8,300. Additionally, due to poor road conditions and inadequate infrastructure, transporting raw materials or supplying briquettes to distant markets was reported to cost a lot of money. Among the participants, women and youth from the southern regions of the country expressed more difficulty meeting this cost. About 60% of women who attended FDG meetings reported producing handmade briquettes, which demand very low investment costs and are sold within the neighborhood.

3.3.4 Market competition with traditional sources of energy

FDG participants reported that their briquettes face market competition due to several reasons. 70% mentioned that some consumers have developed a deep and long-standing interest in fuel wood and charcoal. Therefore, they may be reluctant to switch to briquettes. Others (85%) reported that traditional fuels like firewood and charcoal are readily available and affordable, especially when they can be obtained locally. Moreover, 65% considered that traditional fuels are already popular in many markets compared to briquettes unless considerable effort is attempted to raise awareness about the competitive qualities of briquettes. Finally, 80% of participants reported that consumers are hesitating about the compatibility of briquettes with traditional stoves, especially open-fire three-stone stoves. They may be reluctant to change their cooking habits or incur the cost of buying a new stove

3.4 Way forward to improve briquette sector in Tanzania

Based on extensive discussions with various key informants, it was noted that to improve the briquette sector in Tanzania, a multifaceted approach is needed. In this study, we are reporting the most important key steps and strategies that fit well with the social, economic, and ecological landscapes in Tanzania.

Developing and promoting research on briquette techniques was considered necessary. The country needs to allocate a sufficient budget for research that targets the identification of other locally available feedstocks, binding materials, and efficient briquette machinery. Concurrently, an efficient and consistent monitoring program should be developed to evaluate the impacts of interventions and provide timely feedback to decision-makers.

Moreover, there is a need to strengthen training and capacity-building programs for local entrepreneurs. Prioritized areas for skill development were machine operation, product commercialization, and networking. Also, developing tailor-made short courses, providing study tours, or engaging briquette makers in incubation programs was considered appropriate as most of them were adults.

To increase consumer trust in briquettes, it was suggested that Tanzania create a certification system that will help build the reputation of briquettes. Through accredited laboratories like the Tanzania Bureau of Standards, diverse end-users will be able to choose the correct type of briquettes that can meet their demands. Owing to that, producers could be able to set their production targets.

Given that the majority of briquette producers lack sufficient capital to sustain their businesses, there is a need to mobilize local government authorities (LGAs) to provide grants, subsidies or affordable loans as incentives to encourage the growth of the briquette sector. On the other hand, there is a need to introduce incentives for consumers to speed up their adoption of briquettes. This could be approached through tax breaks or subsidies for public hospitals and schools.

Mainstreaming renewable energy policy into other sectoral policies was considered an important milestone. Developing a clear regulatory framework can help implement policies and regulations that favor the production and use of briquettes. Along with this, stakeholders should be well aware of the challenges facing the briquettes sector in order to promote their policies as a catalyst for a supportive ecosystem for the briquette industry.

4.1 Briquette value chain in Tanzania

A comprehensive understanding of the briquette value chain in Tanzania, as articulated by the FDG and key informants, demonstrates the increasing maturity of the briquette sector in the country. This is further revealed by the consensus among participants that the value chain is expansive and involves a wide range of stakeholders, starting from the collection of raw materials and extending to the ultimate end-users of the briquettes.

However, the current dominance of local entrepreneurs within the value chain could affect the timing and quality of services or products (Mwampamba et al., 2013). This is due to limited knowledge and experience in briquette production and marketing among local entrepreneurs (Yu et al., 2022). Additionally, the value chain indicated some important gaps worth integrating. These include research and development, policy and regulation, and lobbying and advocacy.

Overall, there is a need to strengthen interactions between local briquette producers and potential actors in order to accelerate the development of the briquette sector in the country (Asamoah et al., 2016). Involving research institutions, the donor community, decision-makers, quality certification boards, financial institutions, and tax regulatory authorities can collectively contribute to improvement, sustainability and efficiency in the briquette production and distribution process (Mia et al., 2020; Yustas et al., 2022). These insights lay a strong foundation for further analysis of the briquette value chain in Tanzania.

4.2 Access and availability of raw materials

Based on responses that emerged during focus group discussions (FGDs), it became evident that raw materials for briquette production in Tanzania were primarily obtained from two sources: crop wastes and timber factories. Producers of briquettes often take the initiative to collect these materials themselves, reflecting their hands-on involvement in the initial stages of the value chain (Rawat and Kumar, 2022). This practice not only underscores their commitment to sustainability but also offers a direct and cost-effective means of sourcing the necessary ingredients for briquette manufacturing (Asamoah et al., 2016).

In some regions of Tanzania, an interesting pattern emerged, where youth and women were engaged as suppliers of raw materials to briquette factories. This arrangement presents an opportunity for employment generation, particularly among these demographic groups, contributing to economic empowerment and localized economic development. The engagement of youth and women in the collection of raw materials is indicative of the diverse and inclusive nature of the briquette value chain (Mwamlima et al., 2023).

However, a noteworthy finding from our FGDs is the absence of specialized suppliers of raw materials that serve all surveyed regions uniformly. Unlike some industries where there are dedicated intermediaries or suppliers who provide raw materials on a broader scale (Lei et al., 2013), the briquette value chain in Tanzania seems to rely more on a decentralized system of collection. This decentralization may have implications for the stability of the supply of raw materials and highlights potential areas for further exploration and intervention.

On the other hand, it was notable that the utilization of briquette feedstocks derived from waste generated in protected areas is not yet a prevalent practice in Tanzania's briquette industry. Invasive plant species from wildlife rangelands and forest by-products have been exploited for briquettes in other countries (Munjeri et al., 2016; Shuma and Madyira, 2017). The observed distinction in Tanzania can be attributed to several factors, primarily reflecting a lack of awareness about the potential availability and utility of such feedstock sources. Therefore, the potential of feedstocks from protected areas remains largely untapped

Furthermore, formal permits are required to access protected areas, including wildlife rangelands and forest reserves in Tanzania. These rules are aimed at conserving the natural environment and the wildlife within these biodiversity-rich landscapes (Spenceley et al., 2017). However, these strict entry requirements act as a barrier to those considering the exploitation of feedstocks from such areas for briquette production.

The gap between the potential availability of feedstocks in protected areas and the lack of utilization reflects a need for awareness-raising among local communities about respecting and adhering to the existing conservation regulations. This presents a pathway toward promoting eco-friendly and sustainable briquette production while preserving the natural heritage of protected areas in Tanzania (Han et al., 2018). However, scientific analysis is needed to determine the feasibility and sustainability of available feedstock within the respective protected areas. This is very true given that the abundance and diversity of forest resources vary spatially (Muller-Landau et al., 2021).

4.3 Technological limitations and their implications

The reported poor technology within the briquette industry in Tanzania can be a valuable resource for addressing these challenges. Inconsistent briquette quality like shape, weight and compression weight can lead to consumer dissatisfaction. Studies have shown that it is important to build a loyal customer base in order to maintain sales and business sustainability (Hanaysha et al., 2022). Limited acceptance of briquettes can limit their market growth. Consequently, this reduces the income of producers and impacts their livelihood (Akowuah et al., 2012)

The evolving discussions about ash content in briquettes revealed that existing carbonization processes in Tanzania employ primitive technologies. The use of local-made carbonizers like old metal drums or brick kilns could be cost-saving, but they do not guarantee the quality of briquettes (Asamoah et al., 2016). Because ash content reduces heat output, it may delay cooking, causing consumers to burn more briquettes. This outcome has already been a source of wide concern among users in terms of wasting time and money (Dalkhsuren et al., 2023). While using charcoal dust as briquette feedstock has been widely adopted (Hwangdee et al., 2022), this practice can equally accelerate tree cutting and undermine the environmental benefits of briquette production (Njenga et al., 2014). However, with proper handling of feedstock and optimization of the carbonization process, ash content can be significantly reduced to the recommended level (Yustas et al., 2022).

Operating briquette machines with low yields and frequent breakdowns could be discouraging to entrepreneurs. In reality, inefficient production technology leads to increased production costs, lower income, and failure to meet production targets (Kpalo et al., 2020). Additionally, poor processing and production of briquettes could lead to substandard products whose combustion provides less heat output and emits a significant amount of particulate matter and smokes (Igboanugo et al., 2015; Shen and Xue, 2014). Smoke emissions contribute to indoor air pollution, impacting the health of women and children (Leung, 2015). Interest in clean cooking energy is a global concern (Rosenthal et al., 2018). Likewise, in Tanzania, the country’s president, Samia Suluhu Hassan, announced her vision of increasing clean cooking energy methods by 80–90% by 2032 (Olowolayemo, 2023).

4.4 Market competitiveness

Despite expressed motivation during the FDG to upscale briquette production, competing with traditional charcoal in the market can indeed be a challenge in Tanzania. This is because traditional charcoal and firewood have been a long-established and widely used resources for domestic energy (Doggart et al., 2020). In some regions, especially rural areas, firewood and charcoal could be obtained at a very cheap price (Felix, 2015). Confronted with this tough challenge, strategic plans are needed to attract users’ attention to briquettes as a new source of cooking energy rather than a replacement for charcoal or firewood. Further efforts are needed beyond improving quality, branding or education about briquettes. Partnerships with charcoal retailers and distributors can help promote the briquette market (Mwampamba et al., 2013). We anticipate that charcoal sellers will perceive this approach as a profitable business that aligns with environmentally friendly practices.

The analysis of key informant views entails that Tanzania demands a holistic approach to taking the briquette sector to the next level. This indicates an understanding of the multifaceted challenges and opportunities within the briquette sector. The deployment of both short-term and long-term targets for a sustainable future for the briquette industry is a crucial insight.

A platform is needed to bring together key stakeholders, including government agencies, donor communities, community-based organizations, briquette producers and consumers, to address prevailing challenges and opportunities within the industry. This can accelerate benefits like advocacy, financial support, sharing of resources, and the decision-making process.

To develop a sustainable source of feedstock from renewable and responsibly managed sources. This target should be supported by a scientific survey that can provide reliable evidence of the abundance, distribution and physical qualities of the identified feedstock. Additionally, education is needed for briquette producers on the proper handling of new types of feedstock that have the potential to cause health risks or become invasive in un-targeted locations.

Promoting policies that explicitly support the production and use of briquettes in Tanzania is indeed a crucial step in ensuring the sustainability of the briquette sector. Currently, the country has several policies related to the development of the energy sector and environmental conservation. However, these policies still need to develop a clear framework that can support the briquette sector on the ground.

The initiative to improve the capacity of local industries in Tanzania is a commendable effort because it has a positive economic impact. This initiative will help produce high-quality and affordable machines for local briquette producers, making the country self-sufficient.

Conclusion

Overall, the study has highlighted the promising opportunities for the briquette sector in Tanzania, pointing to potential future growth and sustainability. These opportunities, as mentioned in the study, can significantly benefit the country's energy landscape, environment, and socioeconomic development. Leveraging these opportunities can lead to a more sustainable and eco-friendly energy sector in Tanzania

However, a number of drawbacks and challenges still persist in the briquette sector, which pose obstacles to its competitiveness. These include inadequate briquette-making technologies, high operation costs of carbonization and production, a lack of knowledge and skills in briquette production, a lack of supporting policies, and strong competition from traditional fuels, such as charcoal.

With the right strategies and actions, the briquette sector in Tanzania has the potential to advance significantly. Some key steps to promote its growth include promoting awareness about the benefits of briquettes among diverse stakeholders. Modernizing production processes and equipment to boost production and quality. Identify and expand the market for briquettes, including partnerships with local and international businesses. Investing in research and long-term monitoring to develop new and more efficient briquette technology. Finally, advocating for policies that support the briquette sector, such as incentives for product certification, sustainable production and distribution.

Data availability: The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request

Conflict of interests: Authors declares that they have no competing interest

Funding: Fund for conducting data collection was granted by the Tanzania Forest Fund (TaF).

Authors’ contributions: JK was responsible for collecting primary data, analysing the data, and writing the manuscript for the study.

Acknowledgement: The author express gratitude to Mr. Kasim Ali from Tanzania Forest Services (TFS) and Ms. Lilian Magafu from Tanzania Forest Fund (TaF) for their assistance with logistics in organizing the workshops related to the study on biomass briquettes in Tanzania. This acknowledgment recognizes their valuable support in making the research possible and highlights the collaborative efforts of various stakeholders in addressing the challenges and opportunities in the biomass briquette sector.

Alananga S.S., Igangula N.H. (2022) Constrained cooking energy choices: Understanding up-the-ladder stacking behaviour in Dar es Salaam Tanzania. Energy Policy 168:113087.
Akogun O.A., Waheed M.A., Ismaila S.O., Dairo O.U. (2022) Physical and combustion indices of thermally treated cornhusk and sawdust briquettes for heating applications in Nigeria. Journal of natural fibers 19:1201–1216.
Akowuah J.O., Kemausuor F., Mitchual S.J. (2012) Physico-chemical characteristics and market potential of sawdust charcoal briquette. International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering 3:1–6.
Aransiola E., Oyewusi T., Osunbitan J., Ogunjimi L. (2019) Effect of binder type, binder concentration and compacting pressure on some physical properties of carbonized corncob briquette. Energy Reports 5:909–918.
Arvola A., Malkamäki A., Penttilä J., Toppinen A. (2019) Mapping the future market potential of timber from small-scale tree farmers: Perspectives from the Southern Highlands in Tanzania. Small-scale Forestry 18:189–212.
Asamoah B., Nikiema J., Gebrezgabher S., Odonkor E., Njenga M. (2016) A review on production, marketing and use of fuel briquettes.
Aslam Z., Li H., Hammerton J., Andrews G., Ross A., Lovett J.C. (2021) Increasing access to electricity: An assessment of the energy and power generation potential from biomass waste residues in Tanzania. Energies 14:1793.
Bukombe J.K., Nkwabi A.K., Mangewa L.J., Sweke E.A., Kavana P.Y., Liseki S.D., Kija H.H. (2021) Alien Invasive Species in Tanzania. Invasive Alien Species: Observations and Issues from Around the World 1:263–290.
Buliva K.O., Odera B.O., Muumbo A.M. (2020) Automation of briquetting using hydraulic actuators.
Dalkhsuren D., Iwabuchi K., Itoh T., Narita T., Piash M.I., Nachin B., Sukhbaatar G. (2023) Effects of ash composition and combustion temperature on reduced particulate matter emission by biomass carbonization. BioEnergy Research 16:1629–1638.
Dinesha P., Kumar S., Rosen M.A. (2019) Biomass briquettes as an alternative fuel: A comprehensive review. Energy Technology 7:1801011.
Doggart N., Ruhinduka R., Meshack C.K., Ishengoma R.C., Morgan-Brown T., Abdallah J.M., Spracklen D.V., Sallu S.M. (2020) The influence of energy policy on charcoal consumption in urban households in Tanzania. Energy for Sustainable Development 57:200–213.
Dyanka E.W. (2020) The role of Village Community Banks (VICOBAs) on economic empowerment to women smallholder farmers in kilosa district, Tanzania, Sokoine University of Agriculture.
Emerhi E. (2011) Physical and combustion properties of briquettes produced from sawdust of three hardwood species and different organic binders. Advances in Applied Science Research 2:236–246.
Felix M., Gheewala S.H. (2011) A review of biomass energy dependency in Tanzania. Energy procedia 9:338–343.
Felix M. (2015) Future prospect and sustainability of wood fuel resources in Tanzania. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews 51:856–862.
Gizachew B., Rizzi J., Shirima D.D., Zahabu E. (2020) Deforestation and connectivity among protected areas of Tanzania. Forests 11:170.
Ghaffar S., Nasir A., Azhar M., Farid M.U. (2015) Physico-thermal characterization of biomass materials of different nature of briquettes. J Agric Res 53:555–565.
Han H.-S., Jacobson A., Bilek E.T., Sessions J. (2018) Waste to Wisdom: Utilizing forest residues for the production of bioenergy and biobased products. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 34:5–10.
Hanaysha J.R., Al-Shaikh M.E., Kumar P. (2022) An Examination of Customer Relationship Management and Business Sustainability in Small and Medium Enterprises. International Journal of Customer Relationship Marketing and Management (IJCRMM) 13:1–20.
Hwangdee P., Charee S., Kheowkrai W., Junsiri C., Laloon K. (2022) Application of the Simplex-Centroid Mixture Design to Biomass Charcoal Powder Formulation Ratio for Biomass Charcoal Briquettes. Sustainability 14:3940.
Hoffmann H., Uckert G., Reif C., Müller K., Sieber S. (2015) Traditional biomass energy consumption and the potential introduction of firewood efficient stoves: insights from western Tanzania. Regional Environmental Change 15:1191–1201.
Igboanugo A., Ajieh M., Azi S. (2015) Performance evaluation of a biomass stove using particulate matter and carbon monoxide emission from briquette and fuel wood. Nigerian Journal of Technology 34:484–490.
Kajumba P.K., Okello D., Nyeinga K., Nydal O.J. (2022) Assessment of the energy needs for cooking local food in Uganda: A strategy for sizing thermal energy storage with cooker system. Energy for Sustainable Development 67:67–80.
Keddar S., Strachan S., Soltowski B., Galloway S. (2021) An overview of the technical challenges facing the deployment of electric cooking on hybrid PV/diesel mini-grid in rural Tanzania—A case study simulation. Energies 14:3761.
Kpalo S.Y., Zainuddin M.F., Manaf L.A., Roslan A.M. (2020) A review of technical and economic aspects of biomass briquetting. Sustainability 12:4609.
Kumar R., Chandrashekar N. (2020) Production and characterization of briquettes from invasive forest weeds: Lantana camara and Prosopis juliflora. Journal of the Indian Academy of Wood Science 17:158–164.
Lei T., Wang Z., Li Z., Xu J., He X., Zhu J. (2013) A biomass briquetting fuel machine and its large-scale operation system. Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy 5.
Leung D.Y. (2015) Outdoor-indoor air pollution in urban environment: challenges and opportunity. Frontiers in Environmental Science 2:69.
Magali J. (2022) The influence of VICOBA microcredits on women empowerment in Korogwe town, Tanzania. Journal of Business 8:2021–117.
Malimbwi R.E., Zahabu E.M. (2008) Woodlands and the charcoal trade: the case of Dar es Salaam City.
Mwamlima P., Chacha N., Mwitalemi S., Joachim K., Prosperous F. (2023) Efficiency of place-based innovated briquettes making technologies for sustainable cooking energy in Tanzania. East African Journal of Science, Technology and Innovation 4.
Mwampamba T.H., Owen M., Pigaht M. (2013) Opportunities, challenges and way forward for the charcoal briquette industry in Sub-Saharan Africa. Energy for Sustainable Development 17:158–170.
Mia M.A., Zhang M., Zhang C., Kim Y. (2020) Are microfinance institutions in South-East Asia pursuing objectives of greening the environment?, Climate Change Mitigation and Sustainable Development, Routledge. pp. 43–59.
Mokaya D.C., Koske J.K., Gichuki C., Ngare I.O., Kariuki C.N., Kipkemoi I., Gickuki L. (2020) Hindrances to Adoption of Biomass Briquettes Technology as a Climate Change Mitigation Measure-Case Study of Maasai-Mau Forest adjacent Community, Kenya. International Journal of Renewable Energy Sources 5.
Morales-Máximo M., Rutiaga-Quiñones J.G., Masera O., Ruiz-García V.M. (2022) Briquettes from Pinus spp. residues: Energy savings and emissions mitigation in the rural Sector. Energies 15:3419.
Muller-Landau H.C., Cushman K., Arroyo E.E., Martinez Cano I., Anderson‐Teixeira K.J., Backiel B. (2021) Patterns and mechanisms of spatial variation in tropical forest productivity, woody residence time, and biomass. New Phytologist 229:3065–3087.
Munjeri K., Ziuku S., Maganga H., Siachingoma B., Ndlovu S. (2016) On the potential of water hyacinth as a biomass briquette for heating applications. International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering 7:37–43.
Mushi H., Yanda P.Z., Kleyer M. (2020) Socioeconomic factors determining extraction of non-timber forest products on the slopes of Mt. Kilimanjaro, Tanzania. Human Ecology 48:695–707.
Nyamoga G.Z., Solberg B. (2019) A review of studies related to charcoal production, consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions in Tanzania. Agriculture and Ecosystem Resilience in Sub Saharan Africa: Livelihood Pathways Under Changing Climate:357–399.
NBS. (2012) Populations and housing census Dar es Salaam.
Njenga M., Karanja N., Karlsson H., Jamnadass R., Iiyama M., Kithinji J., Sundberg C. (2014) Additional cooking fuel supply and reduced global warming potential from recycling charcoal dust into charcoal briquette in Kenya. Journal of cleaner production 81:81–88.
Olowolayemo O.V. (2023) Transitioning to the use of lpg for cooking and its impact on local and national energy security, Norwegian University of Life Sciences.
Olabisi M., Tschirley D.L., Nyange D., Awokuse T. (2019) Energy demand substitution from biomass to imported kerosene: Evidence from Tanzania. Energy Policy 130:243–252.
Rawat S., Kumar S. (2022) Critical review on processing technologies and economic aspect of bio-coal briquette production. Preparative Biochemistry & Biotechnology 52:855–871.
Rodrigues A.J., Odero M.O., Kerich D., Odundo F., Akuno W. (2017) Up Scaling Invasive Plant Biomass Briquette Production: Case of Kendu Bay, Lake Victoria, Kenya.
Rosenthal J., Quinn A., Grieshop A.P., Pillarisetti A., Glass R.I. (2018) Clean cooking and the SDGs: Integrated analytical approaches to guide energy interventions for health and environment goals. Energy for Sustainable Development 42:152–159.
Rupf G.V., Bahri P.A., de Boer K., McHenry M.P. (2015) Barriers and opportunities of biogas dissemination in Sub-Saharan Africa and lessons learned from Rwanda, Tanzania, China, India, and Nepal. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 52:468–476.
Shen G., Xue M. (2014) Comparison of carbon monoxide and particulate matter emissions from residential burnings of pelletized biofuels and traditional solid fuels. Energy & fuels 28:3933–3939.
Sotannde O., Oluyege A., Abah G. (2010) Physical and combustion properties of briquettes from sawdust of Azadirachta indica. Journal of Forestry research 21:63–67.
Shuma R., Madyira D.M. (2017) Production of loose biomass briquettes from agricultural and forestry residues. Procedia Manufacturing 7:98–105.
Spenceley A., Rylance A., Laiser S.L. (2017) Protected area entrance fees in Tanzania: The search for competitiveness and value for money. Koedoe: African Protected Area Conservation and Science 59:1–8.
Yu S., Lew V., Ma W., Bao Z., Hao J.L. (2022) Unlocking key factors affecting utilization of biomass briquettes in Africa through SWOT and analytic hierarchy process: a case of Madagascar. Fuel 323:124298.
Yustas Y.M., Tarimo W.M., Mbacho S.A., Kiobia D.O., Makange N.R., Kashaija A.T., Mukama E.B., Mzigo C.K., Silungwe F.R. (2022) Toward Adaptation of Briquettes Making Technology for Green Energy and Youth Employment in Tanzania: A Review. Journal of Power and Energy Engineering 10:74–93.
Yustas Y., Tarimo W., Mbacho S., Kiobia D., Makange N., Kashaija A., Silungwe F. (2022) Likelihood of Adopting Briquette Technology in Abundance of Competitive Energy Sources: A Case Study of Morogoro Urban and Rural Districts, Tanzania. Journal of Energy Research and Reviews 11:11–20.

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Editorial decision: Revision requested
13 Jan, 2024
Reviews received at journal
18 Dec, 2023
Reviewers agreed at journal
12 Dec, 2023
Reviewers agreed at journal
11 Dec, 2023
Reviewers agreed at journal
11 Dec, 2023
Reviewers invited by journal
11 Dec, 2023
Editor assigned by journal
11 Nov, 2023
Submission checks completed at journal
03 Nov, 2023
First submitted to journal
30 Oct, 2023

You are reading this latest preprint version

Opportunities, challenges and the way forward for biomass briquettes in Tanzania

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Material and Methods

3.0 Results

3.1 Briquette value chain, stakeholders and existing technologies

3.2 Opportunities for briquette production in Tanzania

3.3 Challenges facing briquette production in Tanzania

3.3.1 Temporal variation on supply of raw materials

3.3.2 Lack of improved technology

3.3.3 High investment costs

3.3.4 Market competition with traditional sources of energy

3.4 Way forward to improve briquette sector in Tanzania

4.0 Discussion

4.1 Briquette value chain in Tanzania

4.2 Access and availability of raw materials

4.3 Technological limitations and their implications

4.4 Market competitiveness

5.0 Preparedness for a Sustainable Briquette Industry in Tanzania

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1