Skip to Main Navigation

Cooking with Electricity : A Cost Perspective (English)

Cooking with electricity could make a significant contribution to achieving Sustainable Development Goal No.7 by simultaneously enabling cost-effective access to modern energy and clean cooking, and proposing the steps needed to realize this opportunity. Five case studies are presented, comparing the current and projected costs to the consumer of a range of electric cooking (eCooking) solutions with current expenditures on cooking fuels. The findings show that eCooking can be a cost-effective option for some consumers in both off-grid and grid-connected settings and is likely to become increasingly viable in the near future. The use of energy efficient eCooking appliances can challenge the widespread perception that electricity is too expensive for cooking in developing country contexts. Innovative financing and delivery models are vital in making eCooking devices affordable. This will hinge upon private sector willingness—in particular solar companies, mini grid operators, and utilities—to adopt the technology as part of the services offered to customers. Unlocking these emerging opportunities could enable transformative impact for the 2.8 billion people still cooking with biomass. This will take concerted global effort to create an enabling environment that can facilitate the integration of electric cooking into electrification planning and renewable energy investments.

Details

  • Author

    ESMAP

  • Document Date

    2020/09/21

  • Document Type

    ESMAP Paper

  • Report Number

    153151

  • Volume No

    1

  • Total Volume(s)

    2

  • Country

    World,

  • Region

    The World Region,

  • Disclosure Date

    2020/09/22

  • Disclosure Status

    Disclosed

  • Doc Name

    Cooking with Electricity : A Cost Perspective

  • Keywords

    energy sector management assistance; results-based financing; Electricity; Savings and Credit Cooperative; Solar Home System; Access to Electricity; demand for electricity; use energy; clean fuel; cooking fuel; cost of electricity; liquefied petroleum gas; use of energy; fossil fuel subsidy; support policy; billion people; private sector player; energy for all; mini grid; lack of awareness; reducing electricity demand; cost of quality; atmospheric particulate matter; liquified petroleum gas; reducing energy demand; analytical and advisory; carbon dioxide equivalent; energy service companies; energy service company; population with access; net present value; household energy demand; private sector financing; household electric appliance; primary cooking fuel; amount of electricity; energy efficient product; privileges and immunity; lack of supply; Supply Chain Development; costs for consumer; production credit; national grid; electric cooking; charcoal price; biomass fuel; rural area; business model; energy storage; lifeline tariff; grid electricity; household cooking; electricity access; model result; battery storage; fuel price; gender equity; aggregate data; value chain; electricity tariff; utility model; focus group; low tariff; Investment strategies; sensitivity analysis; automatic control; disadvantaged people; health benefit; development partner; biomass cooking; solar resource; affordable installment; cost-effective option; financing mechanism; input data; energy access; low power; electricity sector; field trial; alternating current; electricity price; household income; urban context; generating capacity; grid system; load management; target market; daily cooking; load shedding; overall cost; kilowatt hour; energy transition; written permission; woman entrepreneur; energy infrastructure; political objective; credit option; electrification sector; trial period; individual household; electrical infrastructure; empowering women; grid access; grant funding; collected data; consumer awareness; cooking practice; poor household; electricity usage; average household; european commission; per household; fuel type; traditional fuel; traditional biomass; parameter value; targeted subsidy; international competition; Equity Finance; political interest; original work; non-profit organization; learning opportunity; delivery infrastructure; financing instrument; Boosting Growth; commercial purpose; long-term loan; stakeholder workshop; social impact; energy investment; health goal; electricity grid; crop residue; copyright owner; working capital; pay-as-you-go system; sustainable energy; regular repayment; social network; deforested area; sole responsibility; monthly bill; recent years; cost-effective solution; energy specialist; battery capacity; utility tariff; severely limits; solid biomass; generation capacity; supply constraint; product market; tariff increase; electricity distribution; charcoal market; current expenditure; capital expense; solar electric; manual control; coal dust; solar company; high tariff; grid connection; Market Intelligence; collect firewood; livelihood opportunity; solar panel; solar irradiation; connected system; low energy; grid tariff; behavioral change; consumer lending; supply side; financing option; market financing; solar system; project costing; electric battery; fuel cost; battery bank; product distribution; national utility; fuel option; cooking device; charcoal stove; surplus generation

Downloads

COMPLETE REPORT

Official version of document (may contain signatures, etc)

  • Official PDF
  • TXT*
  • Total Downloads** :
  • Download Stats
  • *The text version is uncorrected OCR text and is included solely to benefit users with slow connectivity.

Citation

ESMAP

Cooking with Electricity : A Cost Perspective (English). Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP) Washington, D.C. : World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/920661600750772102/Cooking-with-Electricity-A-Cost-Perspective