Alternative Cooking Technologies for

Sheephead Traders in NUNU

Prepared for: The City of Cape Town

Prepared by: Ashleigh Hein, Liam Swanson,

Anza Khubana, Nhlanhla Makhanye

Key Words: cooking, technology, sheephead traders, waste disposal,

Nyanga, Cape Town, Upgrade

03/02/2016

Page | 2

Synopsis
The City of Cape Town is planning to upgrade the Nyanga trading area. One of the
groups of traders in the area are the sheephead traders. Despite them not owning or
paying for the land they trade on, the city does not want to forcefully evict them as they
have been trading there for over 50 years. The City would rather work with the traders
to improve their trading methods and environment. The City has thus approached a
team from Engineers Without Boarders South Africa to provide solutions to 1. Reduce
the amount of wood used by the traders for cooking and 2. Improving their waste and
wood storage procedures 3. Reduce the amount of smoke being released into the
surroundings. This can be done by introducing alternative and more efficient cooking
stove. Several cooking technologies were researched: Biomass stove, Rocket Stove,
Estufa Finca, Braai Stove, Justa Stove and the Double-drum stove. Based on the
research the Estufa Finca, Braai and Rocket stoves seemed most suited for the traders.
An Estufa Finca stove was built and it was found to be very easy and cheap to make. As
expected the traders were very apprehensive about this new technology. They do not
want to deviate far from their current cooking method and they do not seem to
understand the concept of efficiency. When the Estufa Finca stove was tested some
smoke was released and the traders also worry that the stove is too tall and will not be
capable of reaching the same boiling capacity. It is thus recommended that further
testing be done and the necessary modifications made. The stove should then be taken
through a procedure of community organisations (such as the SNACS and Gunye
Reference Group) to assist in implementation. After a collaborative involvement with
community representatives a cook off with the traders can be held. The stove should
then be taken to the traders and a cook-off held so that they can see firsthand how
efficient the stove is and they can compare it to their current method of cooking. The
wool still needs to be burnt off of the sheepheads and thus a big fire is needed. It is
suggested that a braai type design be used for this and in the long-term a chimney
could be added. Pests are a problem as the wood just piles up and rots and they keep
buying/receiving more and more. It is suggested that there should be one area for wood
storage and one area for waste storage. A container or bin could possibly be used for
the wood storage and thus when full they cannot accept more wood but this would need
to be regulated. It is also suggested that community organizations like SNACS be
involved in the negotiation process.

Page | 3

Table of Contents
Synopsis...................................................................................................................... 2
Table of Contents........................................................................................................... 3
List of Figures............................................................................................................... 4
List of Tables................................................................................................................. 5
Glossary....................................................................................................................... 5
1.

2.

Introduction............................................................................................................ 1
1.1

Subject of Report.............................................................................................. 1

1.2

Background to Report........................................................................................ 1

1.3

Objectives of Report.......................................................................................... 1

1.4

Scope and Limitations........................................................................................ 1

1.5

Plan of Development......................................................................................... 2

Literature Review.................................................................................................... 3
2.1

3.

Alternative Cooking Technologies........................................................................3

2.1.1

The Justa Stove.......................................................................................... 3

2.1.2

The Double-Drum Stove.............................................................................. 4

2.1.3

The Rocket Stove....................................................................................... 7

2.1.4

The Biomass Stove..................................................................................... 9

2.1.5

The Estufa Finca Stove.............................................................................. 10

Experimental........................................................................................................ 12
3.1

Procedure...................................................................................................... 12

3.1.1

Meeting with Wiebke Toussaint (Engineers Without Borders South Africa).........12

3.1.2

Meeting with David Lello (Khaya Power).......................................................13

3.1.3

Meeting with Wikus Kruger from the Energy Research Centre (ERC) UCT........14

3.1.4

Meeting with City of Cape Town (CoCT) Officials...........................................14

3.1.5

Site Visit 14 December 2015......................................................................15

3.1.6

Meeting with Jiska de Groot (ERC UCT).......................................................16

3.1.7

Testing Braai Stove................................................................................... 16

3.1.8

Site Visit 26 January 2016..........................................................................16

3.1.9

Building Estufa Finka Stove........................................................................16

3.1.10

Testing Estufa Finca Stove.........................................................................19

Page | 4
4.

Risk Assessment................................................................................................... 20

5.

Results and Discussion.......................................................................................... 21

5.1

5.1.1

Braai Test................................................................................................ 21

5.1.2

Estufa Finca Test...................................................................................... 21

5.2
6.

7.

Results of stove tests....................................................................................... 21

Results of second site visit............................................................................... 22

Conclusions.......................................................................................................... 23
6.1

Unpromising results of Braai test.......................................................................23

6.2

Promising results of Estufa Finca test.................................................................23

6.3

Comments on Site Visits..................................................................................23

Recommendations................................................................................................. 25
7.1

Implement Estufa Finca stove with modifications and further testing:......................25

7.2

Implement alternative stove designs..................................................................25

7.2.1

Brick fireplace (Braai)................................................................................25

7.2.2

Rocket Stove............................................................................................ 25

7.3

Construct area for wood and waste storage........................................................26

7.4

Connection to appropriate water pipes...............................................................26

8.

References........................................................................................................... 27

9.

Appendices.......................................................................................................... 28
9.1

Anglo American Risk Matrix..............................................................................28

9.2

Health and climate impact of various cooking technologies....................................29

9.3

Photographs of the braai stove test....................................................................30

9.4

Photographs of the Estufa Finca stove test.........................................................31

List of Figures
Figure 2.1: Diagram of the Justa Stove...................................................................3
Figure 2.2: Diagram of the Double-Drum Stove (Wartluft, 1975)............................4
Figure 2.3: Diagram of the Double-Drum Stove with measurement (Wartluft,
1975).......................................................................................................................... 5
Figure 2.4: Photograph of the Double-Drum Stove ashtray (Himalayan institute,
2013).......................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 2.5: Photograph of a Rocket Stove (Regenold, 2009)...................................8
Figure 2.6: Photograph of a Biomass Stove (TradeIndia.com, 2016).......................9

Page | 5
Figure 2.7: Photograph of an Estufa Finca Stove (Ternes et al, 2011)...................10
Figure 3.1: Photograph of the lid cutout (James, 2010).........................................18
Figure 3.2: Photograph of the final product (James, 2010)....................................18
Figure 9.1: Figure showing the climate and health impacts of various cooking
stoves (World Bank, 2014)....................................................................................... 29

List of Tables
Table 2.1: Showing the advantages and disadvantages of the Justa stove...............4
Table 2.2: Showing the advantages and disadvantages of the Double-Drum stove. 6
Table 2.3: Showing the advantages and disadvantages of the Rocket stove............8
Table 2.4: Showing the advantages and disadvantages of the Biomass stove.......10
Table 2.5: Showing the advantages and disadvantages of the Estufa Finca stove. 11
Table 4.1: Showing the results of the revised risk assessment for this practical....20
Table 5.1: Showing the results of the braai stove test............................................21
Table 5.2: Showing the results of the Estufa Finca test...........................................21

Glossary

PPE: Personal Protective Equipment that is to be worn during the practical

Pyrolysis: Heating without air, that releases gases
SNACKS:

Page | 1

1. Introduction
1.1 Subject of Report
This report proposes alternative cooking technologies and methods of waste disposal
for the sheephead traders in Nyanga.

1.2 Background to Report

The City of Cape Town plans to upgrade the trading areas around the Nyanga Transport
Interchange. This will involve allocating trading areas to the various traders. The traders
occupy a large area, their woodpiles taking up most of the space. These piles attract
rats and cockroaches. They dispose of their waste into the municipal waste water
system. The City of Cape Town anticipates that the traders will be reluctant to change
their way of doing business and if they continue to trade as they are they will not abide
by the new regulations that will be imposed following the upgrade. They have thus
approached Engineers Without Boarders South Africa (EWBSA) to assist them with
suggesting alternative cooking technologies and means of waste disposal that could
help the traders occupy less space and abide by the new regulations.

1.3 Objectives of Report

The objectives of the report are to:

Propose more efficient cooking technologies that the traders can invest in
and/or make themselves.
Suggest improved methods of waste storage and disposal
Draw conclusions on the best cooking technology and means of waste
disposal and storage.
Make recommendations as to which cooking technology and waste
storage and disposal methods should be implemented.

1.4 Scope and Limitations

This report provides suggestions of alternative and more efficient cooking technologies
that are inexpensive as it is anticipated that the traders will be reluctant to invest large

Page | 2
amounts of money in new stoves when their business is doing well with their open fires.
More expensive cooking technologies are thus not discussed in this report. Waste
storage and disposal methods suggested in this report are limited to what the City of
Cape Town can provide. So more expensive means of waste storage and disposal are
not highlighted. Also current regulations prohibits the use of crates on the trading sites
which needs to be addressed.

1.5 Plan of Development

Firstly, a review of the literature that was studied for the investigation is given. This was
done to support the chosen methodology and to explain the necessary theory. The
experimental section follows which gives a detailed account of the method and
apparatus used in the study. A risk assessment was carried out using the Anglo
American Risk Matrix prior to the experiment. This assessment was then revised after
the practical was performed. The results of both assessments are given in the Risk
analysis section. The results are then analyzed and discussed. Conclusions and
recommendations are then made based on these results. Additional information and
photographs and the Anglo American Risk Matrix are provided in the Appendices.

Page | 3

2. Literature Review
2.1 Alternative Cooking Technologies
2.1.1 The Justa Stove
The Justa stove is a rocket stove with ceramic material built around it as an
insulator, usually clay, cement, bricks or metal. It is flexible to any shape and size
depending on the requirements, with the rocket stove inside being the limiting
factor. A chimney can be built at the top of the rocket stove, allowing the smoke
to escape in a control flow avoiding exposure by the users. The ceramic allows
the stove to be built permanently on the ground. A metal griddle or flat plate is
used at the top, supporting the pot. The insulated firebox forces the heat directly
underneath this metal griddle improving the cooking efficiency. The insulation
reduces fuel consumption by 50% [1]. Under the chimney, a channel is included to
catch the soot, which helps when cleaning the stove. Different fuels are
applicable, including wood, coal, pellets, etc. Overall, the Justa stove saves up to
70% of fuel consumption, and the chimney helps remove 95% of the toxic gases
which are harmful to the users [2].
Figure 2.1 below is a schematic example of a Justa stove. Two cylindrical
patterns are used to make the L-shaped rocket elbow and a ceramic material is
built around it (insulator). The insulator is made of either wood ash or clay and
the body built from bricks or clay. A chimney made of a thin metal sheet is
attached to the top griddle or metal plate behind the brick walls. A small section is
left at the bottom of the rocket elbow, where wood is loaded. This allows easy
removal of the ash which makes it easier to clean.

Figure 2.1: Diagram of the Justa Stove

Page | 4
Table 2.1: Showing the advantages and disadvantages of the Justa stove
Advantages
Cheap to build
Low maintenance
Insulation increases the efficiency

Disadvantages
Produces ash which is not easy to
remove
Limited to indoor use
Can be difficult to construct with the metal
and ceramic

Harmful gases directed away from the

surrounding air

2.1.2 The Double-Drum Stove

The Sheephead traders in Nyanga are currently using the 55-gallon drums as
pots for cooking and boiling water. A bigger stove is thus required for stability and
increasing the heat surface area on the pot. Using another big drum would solve
the size problem to improve stability and heat surface area. To build a doubledrum stove requires a 30 and 55-gallon drum, stovepipe for making a chimney, a
metal sheet for making an ash tray, steel rods used to make the handles and a
ceramic material i.e. ash which fills the space between the two drums. Tools
needed for fabrication is a cutting saw, a drill, welding equipment, fasteners,
brazing equipment and a hummer. Figure 2.2 below shows a completed doubledrum stove.

Figure 2.2: Diagram of the Double-Drum Stove (Wartluft, 1975).

Page | 5

Figure 2.3: Diagram of the Double-Drum Stove with measurement (Wartluft, 1975).

Figure 2.3 above shows the design with labeled dimensions. Steps to build the
double-drum stove are as follows:
Cut a circular hole or two at one side of the 55-gallon drum where the
chimney will be inserted (near the top).
Cut a rectangular hole at the bottom of the opposite side. This is where
the ash tray will fit. Figure 2.4 bellow show the sliding ash tray.
Bore one hole on the bottom seal of the 30-gallon drum, which will allow
the ash to drop through onto the tray
An extra metal (bar or rod or sheet) is inserted inside the bigger drum to
support the smaller drum and allows the tray to slide in and out.
Insert the 30-gallon drum into the 55-gallon drum
Depending on the type of fuel used, a hole is drilled above the tray
section. This is where woods are inserted. If pellets are used, it is not
necessary to cut this hole as pellets can be easily loaded from the top.

Page | 6

The chimney is welded at the back on the cut section and a minimum of
three legs (metal bars) are welded at the bottom seal of the 55-gallon
drum.

Figure 2.4: Photograph of the Double-Drum Stove ashtray (Himalayan institute, 2013).

Table 2.2: Showing the advantages and disadvantages of the Double-Drum stove
Advantages
Concentrated heat (elbow) and can
accommodate insulation which
increases efficiency
Lighter material less heat absorbed
by walls
Mobile
Wood burns at the tips less wood
burnt at the time complete burn
can control rate reduces smoke
Chimney (elbow) increases draft
wood burns rapidly and cleanly
An additional chimney can be added
Heat is directed through narrow
channels that force hot gases against
the pots - increasing heat transfer
efficiency
Outdoor use
Easy to use
Low pollution
Low maintenance
No need to chop wood
Heats up quickly

Disadvantages
Limited size and shape
Need to constantly tend to it (adding or
pushing the wood)
Susceptible to rust
Not easy to control the fire fire tends to
run away - heat tends to escape from the
sides
Uses a lot of wood
Wood does not burn from the tip/head
Produces a lot of smoke

Page | 7

2.1.3 The Rocket Stove

A rocket stove is an efficient cooking stove. Rocket stoves are designed to
increase fuel efficiency without increasing emissions. They require very little fuel
and they are cheap and easy to build. They also help slow down climate change
and saves the lives of people from the open fires that are polluting indoor air. It
was first developed by Doctor Larry Winiarski in the 1980s as a safe, effective,
environmentally conscious alternative open fires for people in impoverished
communities
Elements of a rocket stove
A basic rocket stove consists of just a few components:
An insulated rocket elbow, formed of a horizontal fuel chamber that fits into a
vertical combustion chamber (also referred to as a chimney)
A stove body that surrounds the elbow, made of sheet metal or some other
inexpensive material, with a small opening
A fuel grate, placed inside the fuel chamber, on which the fuel wood rests
A pot skirt, a sheet metal shield that surrounds the cooking vessel, creating a
gap, to ensure that more heat from the flue gases enters the vessel
How does it work?
Rocket stoves can use most any dry plant matter, not just wood leaves, twigs,
and brush will work as well. Fresh air enters the fuel chamber from beneath the
burning wood resting on the grate, allowing the air to be preheated before it
enters the combustion chamber, which in turn leads to cleaner combustion. The
small fuel entry not only demands less fuel wood, but also limits the amount of
cold air that can get in. The combustion itself is confined to a small, insulated
space, so most of the energy in the wood is converted to heat for cooking. The
cook pot sits directly on top of the combustion chamber, so the hot gases contact
it immediately after combustion, reducing smoke. The pot skirt that surrounds the
vessel further improves efficiency by increasing the temperature of the flame that
contacts the pot, and by directing the gases to scrape the sides of the pot as well
as the bottom, increasing heat transfer.

Figure 2.5: Photograph of a Rocket Stove (Regenold, 2009)

Page | 8

Table 2.3: Showing the advantages and disadvantages of the Rocket stove
Advantages
Concentrated heat (elbow) and can
accommodate insulation
Lighter materials are used less heat
lost to walls
Mobile
Wood burns at tips less wood burnt
at a time complete burn-control ratereduce smoke
Chimney (elbow) increases draft
wood burn fiercely and cleanly
Additional chimney (smoke) can be
added
Heat is directed through narrow
channels that force hot gases against
the pots - increasing heat transfer
efficiency
Can use outdoors
Easy to use
Low pollution
Low maintenance
No need to chop wood
Heats up quickly

Disadvantages
Due to building materials: limited size and
shape-use rocket box stove
Tended more frequently (pushing or
adding wood at a time)
Susceptible to rusting

Page | 9
2.1.4 The Biomass Stove
Biomass stoves have been around since 1800s and earlier. Biomass is any material that
is produced by nature, most popular types off biomass fuel are wood pellets, corn, and
manure
How does it work?
Combustion happens in a two-stage process, which makes modern stoves more
efficient. First, there is primary combustion where the main fuel burns with oxygen
from the air to release heat. In theory, if combustion happens perfectly, it releases heat
energy and produces only carbon dioxide and water (steam). In practice, we don't get
complete combustion, so smoke (unburned particles of carbon), carbon monoxide, and
other gases are produced too, wasting energy, reducing efficiency, and making
pollution. That's why, in a well-designed stove, there's also a process of secondary
combustion, where the unburned carbon in the smoke is itself burned to release further
energy and reduce pollution. This is usually achieved by making a stove work in what's
called downdraft mode. Instead of simply having a flue open directly above the burning
fuel (allowing unburned fuels and gases to escape), there's an extra flue at the bottom
and around the back of the stove. With this open, smoke and combustion gases initially
move downward, through the combustion zone, before passing out safely through the
back flue.

Figure 2.6: Photograph of a Biomass Stove (TradeIndia.com, 2016).

Page | 10
Table 2.4: Showing the advantages and disadvantages of the Biomass stove
Advantages
Can use a variety of fuels such as:
crops, food waste or industrial waste,
can also use wood pellets, manure,
corn and dried cherry pits
Close to being carbon neutral
Produces very little waste and smoke

Disadvantages
Expensive to install and fuel can be
expensive (wood pellets)
Dry fuel need storage area
Requires regular cleaning

2.1.5 The Estufa Finca Stove

The stove uses the technique of Top Lit Updraft gasification (TLUG). Gasifier stoves,
unlike other biomass stoves, separate the various stages of combustion. These stages
are: Pyrolysis, combustion of released gases with air, gasification and combustion of
remaining charcoal. By separating these stages efficiency is increased and pollution is
reduced. A good gasifier stoves completely burns all the gases. The stove can be
designed to burn the char or conserve it.

Figure 2.7: Photograph of an Estufa Finca Stove (Ternes et al, 2011).

Page | 11
The stove (Figure 2.7 above) consists of a 20 L drum (combustion chamber) with a
metal shell (galvanized roofing) around it and half of a number 10 tin (large coffee tin)
as a riser on top of the drum. Concrete blocks can be used as a support to ensure
cooking is safe and easy. These are inexpensive and readily available. The air is
preheated in the gap between the drum and the shell and is then directed to the top of
the combustion chamber to be burnt. The shell ensures the combustion chamber
remains hot and the outer surface of the stove cool (Hatfield et al, 2010).
Table 2.5: Showing the advantages and disadvantages of the Estufa Finca stove
Advantages
Disadvantages
Not suited to cooking of large volumes at
Low emissions
one time
Fuel source needs to be cut/chopped so
High efficiency
as to fit in the stove
Useful by-product (charcoal)
Inexpensive and easy to make
Can use a variety of fuels
Scalability unknown
Mobile
Outdoor/indoor use
Low Maintenance
Very Powerful
Uses less wood than other
technologies covered in this report

Page | 12

3. Experimental
3.1 Procedure
This report concerns issues affecting both the Sheephead traders and the community of
Nyanga and in order to best understand the problem and reach a collective solution, it is
advisable that all stakeholders are involved. Interviews, meetings and practical
experiments were arranged to gather information entailed in this report and to get the
perspectives of all parties involved.

3.1.1 Meeting with Wiebke Toussaint (Engineers Without Borders South Africa)
A semi-structured meeting was conducted in private with Wiebke Toussaint, CEO
of Engineers Without Borders South Africa (EWB-SA) on 8 December 2015.
Present in this meeting was Wiebke Toussaint, Liam Swanson, Anza Khubela,
Nhlanhla Makhanye and Ashleigh Hein. Various Stakeholders were introduced by
Wiebke and their contacts were provided. We were each given respective
activities and responsibilities and the opportunity to address questions to Wiebke.
Positions were decided not to be too rigid. Each would contribute to research and
work on a task relevant at the time. Liam was chosen to be the point of contact
with Wiebke, stakeholders and those to be met with.
Wiebke agreed to introduce us to those contacts outside UCT, Nicky Sassman
(CoCT), Jan Kluiver (EWB-NL), Matt Docherty (EWB-SA) and Illana Steenkamp
(VPUU). We were then introduced to Jiska de Groot from UCT who has high
energy and interest in the project. And then agreed that all the other UCT
researchers and knowledgeable people are to be contacted directly (Harro Von
Blottnitz, Wikus Kruger and Holle Wlokas). A meeting with Wikus was set. And
Wiebke agreed to add the group to a google drive containing all information
gathered by EWB thus far and send Matt Dochertys paper on high-efficiency
stoves.
The day was spent on general group familiarization with the problem to be
solved, reading relevant literature and having the open discussion on various
points of view of the problem. It was then planned to start grappling with the
complexity of the environment.
Based on Wiebkes reports on previous visits, our first priority was to:
Develop our understanding of the current business model and
environment
Develop our understanding of stove specifications

Page | 13

Start finding relevant and applicable stove designs and investigate the
feasibility of each.

3.1.2 Meeting with David Lello (Khaya Power)

A meeting with David Lello from Khaya Power was conducted at his private
residence, Stelekaya, in Stellenbosch on 9 December 2015 with the intention of
learning about his own products and finding out information behind general
cooking stove technologies. The meeting was attended by all four students. And
the following points were discussed:

How the Gasification stove is made and used

How to burn the fuels efficiently and techniques to ensure a complete
combustion
Benefits of the Gasifier stove over Rocket Stoves
Using wood Pellets as a fuel (Cost, availability etc.)
Scalability

Gasification methods cause a complete burn i.e. fewer particulates released into
the air and less harmful gases released into the air. One can remove gases by
charring the wood previously (make charcoal) but then lots of the energy in the
wood has been removed. To promote combustion, the stove can have free air
flow (inlet at bottom and outlet like a chimney at the top) or forced air flow.
Forced air flow is obviously more consistent and controllable but needs a fan and
an electric source: the more the air the faster the fuel burn. Khaya stoves have
air gaps and insulation in order to keep the outer temperature down. It was
suggested that the stove is made from a 55 Gallon drums. And that there must
be some sort of separation to prevent burns.
Khaya stoves cannot be much bigger (as yet) than a 25-litre paint bucket. A 5litre sized stove will boil 2 litres of water in an hour. 3Kg of pellets used in 5-litre
stove. Changing the diameter doesnt affect the rate of burn (currently around
1mm/min) but will add more energy. Water Boiling Test is used to determine the
efficiency of the stove. The amount of ash is dependent on the type of fuel used:
pellets make very little ash. One of the problems identified was that fuel cannot
be loaded from above while burning, it must be finished and started again.
Hence, there can be another pod ready to be swapped out. Pellets price is about
R5/kg. This is slightly more expensive than electricity and slightly cheaper than
gas.

Page | 14
It was established that rocket stoves should have an open door to see that fire is
still going and feed wood from the side. David emphasized that we look at the
Global Alliance CC (GACC) and World Bank research. He agreed to look at
hiring out the electric part at a cost per day, however, this adds, even more,
admin and cost. David agreed to provide a document with a lot of relevant
information, which he sent short after our meeting.
We will consider the cost of the Khaya stove in this project to see feasibility but
currently, it does not seem like it will work. Seeing that all these individual costs
might not incentivize the traders, the team suggested that these costs be
incorporated into the rent of the land (regulated by the City of Cape Town).

3.1.3 Meeting with Wikus Kruger from the Energy Research Centre (ERC) UCT
A meeting was conducted at Wikus Krugers office at the ERC department to see
his perspective of the social impact of our project and ways in which to approach
the solution.

3.1.4 Meeting with City of Cape Town (CoCT) Officials

A meeting was conducted in private at the CoCT offices in Langa on the 14
December 2015. Present were Nicky Sasman (CoCt SPUD), Dumisani Ncapayi
(CoCT MURP), Phumlani Ntsele (CoCT ECON DEV), Hilman Maqaza (BAM),
Xolisa Nkayi and Thando Myamya (City Health), Anza Khubana, Ashleigh Hein,
Nhlanhla Makhanye and Liam Swanson (EWB UCT).
Nicky gave a background on how this supports the larger NUNU (Nyanga Urban
Node Upgrade) project, the first phase of which is the implementation of a trading
plan where traders will need to conform to the standard trading contracts of the
City. This is a short and medium term solution: in the long term, the idea is for
them to join a meat-market and food-court at the PTI. Hillman is available to be
part of the meetings, to prepare the traders for the implementation of the trading
plan. Phumlani said City would want to support the traders in whatever way, but
he and Nicky were clear that the City cannot purchase any equipment for the
traders themselves.
Xolisa gave a background on the history of the trading business, and his efforts
at encouraging the traders to improve their conditions. He has built up trust with
them, but it will still be difficult to get financial information from them. Thando
stated that his priority was around reducing and managing the woodpile: this was
a harbour for rats and cockroaches. Secondly, reducing the smoke pollution, and

Page | 15
improving the general cleanliness of their trading area. Dumisani offered to
support the project by including the wider community representatives, the Safe
node Area Committee (SNAC), and the ward councillor.
We raised and discussed many technical questions. We (students) then made
connections with Etafeni, who are keen on the ash for fertiliser. They are
investigating the use of other waste products. This was aimed to reuse the waste
products which will, in turn, help with waste management. It was agreed that we
could recommend more than 1 option which will be implemented for the short,
medium and long term and also make recommendations for when the trading
plan can be implemented.
We met the ward councillor while visiting the slaughter slab on Sithandatu Ave,
and alerted him to the students coming back to site in the second half of January.
He seemed happy to see any progress. Xolisa agreed to be the primary contact
person, and Dumisani and Hillman agreed to support him. Xolisa suggested that
he may need to draw in George Brown / Peter Jaggers (Solid Waste).

3.1.5 Site Visit 14 December 2015

We headed to the site in Nyanga with all the Stakeholders present. Xolisa
introduced us to the traders and we were able to ask them a few questions about
their trading business. Upon arrival, we found that the traders were not cooking
or selling meat on that day but were able to look around. Phumlani suggested
that we go to a nearby trading area where they braai meat. This area seemed to
be more organised and cleaner compared to the sheephead trading site. They
slaughter sheep on site, on a concrete floor and wash all the waste away with
water. This helps to ease the cleaning process. It was also discovered that they
are using hand-made stoves to braai the meat. There were more traders
stationed in a row around the corner at the intersection. We got the opportunity to
ask them questions about their business, cooking techniques, fueling and
storage. The braaiers pay R50/trolley of firewood.

3.1.6

Meeting with Jiska de Groot (ERC UCT)

Page | 16
A meeting was held in private with Jiska de Groot on 15 December 2015. Jiska made
clear the complexity of the social environment that the sheepshead traders operate in. It
was realised that not many inspirations in terms of operation could be taken from the
Braaiers as they operate under different management with different business priorities.
It was interesting to note the female dominated Braaing business compared to a mostly
male sheepshead trading business. Jiska noted that we had a lot of relevant questions
which needed answering and could be asked to the sheepshead traders at our next
visit. The team was given advice on how to approach the traders. It was advised to talk
and dress humbly so as not to appear to be coming as a superior party.

3.1.7 Testing Braai Stove

The test was conducted on 13 January 2016. A brick fireplace in Newlands forest was
used for this test. The test was performed outside and it was windy. Wood from the area
was used. Firelighters and a lighter were used to start the fire. Water in a 5L paint tin
(no lid) was placed on a grid above the fire, once the fire got going, and the time taken
for this water to boil was recorded. The amount of smoke was measured visually and
was rated on a scale of 1 to 5, 1 being extremely small and 5 extremely large smoke.

3.1.8 Site Visit 26 January 2016

A second site visit was organized to get the traders input on the Estufa Finca design.
Questions such as: How much a truck of wood costs, whether there are owners and
employees or only the owners working, how the cooking process works and how long it
takes were asked.

3.1.9 Building Estufa Finka Stove

To build the stove a step-by-step photo guide was followed (James, 2010).
Materials used are listed below:

20l paint tin

0.35m x 1m Corrugated iron
Binding wire
15cm long cylindrical wood
3x M4 Nut and Bolt
16x 3mm pop rivets
4x self-tapping screws

Page | 17

150mm diameter Tin Can (Large Coffee Tin, number 10 tin)

4x right angled elbow supports

The tools used are listed below:

Angle Grinder
Rivet
Tin Snips
Drill
Screwdriver
Hammer
5mm Punch
G-clamp

Method for making the:

Lid:
1. Bend all of the clamps around the lid till flat
2. Remove the gasket
3. Using tin snips cut out the pattern showing in figure 1. Diameter of the circle is
140mm and dimensions of the supports are 20mmx35mm
4. Bend all supports to 90 upwards
5. Place a half of the tin within the boundary of the supports
6. Drill a 3mm hole through each support and the tin at the same time to ensure
alignment
7. Rivet the supports to the tin
8. Take a length of binding wire and bend each end through two separate holes in
the tin clamps so as to form a handle. Repeat on the opposite side of the lid.
Chamber:
1. Remove handle from the tin
2. Drill 16 25mm holes 70mm below rim of the tin. Space the 16 holes evenly
around the tin.
3. Punch between 25 and 30 4mm holes in the base of the tin
4. Wrap corrugate iron around the tin ensuring at least one overlapping valley and
secure the ends together via g-clamp
5. Rivet ends together using 2-4 3mm rivets
6. Slide this sleeve over the tin until the bottom edge is 50mm about the base of the
tin and the top edge lies 20mm above the rim of the tin.
7. Clamp the sleeve to the tin
8. Drill 3x 4mm holes in the middle of the tin through the sleeve and tin. Ensure that
they are spaced evenly around the circumference of the tin.
9. Fasten the sleeve to the tin using the nuts and bolts.

Page | 18
Handles:
1. Screw an elbow support to each end of the wooden cylinder. Repeat for the other
handle
2. Mark where the holes for the handle will go on the sleeve and drill 3mm holes
where marked
3. Rivet handles to sleeve.

Figure 3.1: Photograph of the lid cutout (James, 2010).

Figure 3.2: Photograph of the final product (James, 2010).

3.1.10 Testing Estufa Finca Stove
The stove was tested on the 20th of January 2016. The weather was clear with little
wind. Wood was collected, cut and chopped into the required size. Wood was then

Page | 19
stacked in the stove up to the side holes. Small twigs and firelighters were used to start
the fire. A timer was used to measure the time it takes for the wood to burn completely.
After the fire had built up, a 5-litre tin filled with clean water (uncovered) was placed on
a grid. The time it took to boil was recorded and the 5-litre tin removed. The fire was left
burning until the wood burnt completely, leaving charcoal. The amount of smoke was
measured visually and was rated on a scale of 1 to 5, 1 being extremely small and 5
extremely large smoke.

Page | 20

4. Risk Assessment

When the stoves were tested and the Estufa Finca stove was built the correct PPE was
worn (long pants, hair tied up and closed shoes, gloves). Care was taken when
chopping the wood and only the handles (insulated) of the cans with the boiling water
were handled to avoid burns. When the Estufa Finca stove was built it was built by
people who had experience with using the required tools.

Table 4.1: Showing the results of the revised risk assessment for this practical
Hazard

Classification

Likelihood

Hazard Effect

Risk

Burns

S/H

Unlikely

Minor

3 (L)

Chopping injury

S/H

Unlikely

Insignificant

2 (L)

Slipping due to water

leakage/spilling of
tracer
Building the Estufa
Finca stove using
tools

S/H

Unlikely

Insignificant

2(L)

S/H

Unlikely

Minor

5 (L)

Based on the revised risk assessment the tests are safe as all risks fall into the green
section of the Anglo American Risk Matrix (see Appendix 9.1).

Page | 21

5. Results and Discussion

5.1 Results of stove tests

5.1.1 Braai Test
Table 5.1: Showing the results of the braai stove test

The above table gives the time it took for the water in the paint can to boil. Photos of
this test are included in the appendices and it was found that a large amount of smoke
was released and the heat was not very well contained or concentrated. Ash was
produced which can be used as fertilizer. See Appendix 9.3 for photographs of the test.

5.1.2 Estufa Finca Test

Table 5.2: Showing the results of the Estufa Finca test

The above table gives the time it took for the water in the paint can to boil and how long
the fire lasted for. Charcoal was produced which can be used/sold as a fuel source.

Page | 22
Interestingly a lot of smoke was released but less than the open fire. This is not
supposed to happen. It could possibly be due to paint on the stove burning off or an
error in construction. This would need to be addressed during design refinement. See
Appendix 9.3 for photographs of the test.

5.2 Results of second site visit

After showing the sheephead traders the Estufa Finca stove they were apprehensive
about it. This is because it is a lot smaller than the stove they are currently using. Even
though it would be more efficient and should thus cook the sheepheads faster they are
reluctant to change their cooking strategies. They also feared that the stove was too tall
and it was discovered that an open fire is still needed to burn the wool off the heads.
It was found that the traders consider an expensive load of wood to be R200 and that
there are a lot of employees working for the sheephead traders. We were able to follow
the cooking process from start to finish and got a clear understanding of it. They
estimate that the whole process takes about 1 hour and cooking the heads 20 to 30
minutes.
Since the last visit even more ash and wood had accumulated onsite and another truck
was there to deliver even more wood.

Page | 23

6. Conclusions
Based on the above results, the following conclusions were made:

6.1 Unpromising results of Braai test

Based on the results from the braai test it is clear that this method of cooking would not
solve many of the problems at hand. It does however look neater and provides a single
area for ash buildup and contains the hot coals. The ash can then be scooped from the
stove into bags and disposed of as necessary. A braai-type stove could be used to burn
the wool off the sheepheads and possibly in the long-term a chimney could be built to
direct smoke away from immediate environment. The braai stove took too long to boil as
the heat is lost to the surroundings. The sheephead traders take 20 to 30 minutes to
cook a head so they would not want to have to wait that long just to get the water
boiling. Will also have to buy bricks and cement to make the braai stand and it is a
permanent structure.

6.2 Promising results of Estufa Finca test

The Estufa Finca stove boiled the water quickly, 13 minutes 48s. Some smoke was
released which is not supposed to occur. This could be due to there being paint on the
tin or an error in the design. More testing is needed, especially of larger drums and the
necessary modifications should then be made based on the results. This stove is a
promising option as it is cheap and easy to make and relatively easy to use.

6.3 Comments on Site Visits

As was expected the traders are unwilling to change to alternative cooking technologies
which is understandable as they are successful now and more than likely fear that
change will be bad for their businesses. They do not seem to understand the concept of
efficiency i.e. the Estufa Finca stove at the size we built would not be able to cook the
same amount of heads at one time as they currently do. However, being more efficient it
should cook the heads quicker and overall result in faster production. They worry that
their customers may have to wait for heads but like any restaurant of food place there is
usually a waiting period, they have the monopoly in the area and that would be serving
their customers in a healthier environment. Extra waiting time would not impact on sales
due to the traders monopoly in the area with the added benefit of serving their
customers in a healthier environment.

Page | 24
The waste and wood storage is an issue. Too much wood is being delivered to the site
and ash is not being disposed of often enough. Wood and ash are dumped haphazardly
instead of in designated areas for ash and wood.
Dirty water from boiling and preparation is disposed of into the storm water drain which
contributes to poor environmental practices. The open fire releases too much smoke
which causes air pollution and affects the health of surrounding residents.

7. Recommendations

Page | 25
Based on the foregoing conclusions the following recommendations were made:

7.1 Implement Estufa Finca stove with modifications and further testing:

Perform further tests using a 55 gallon drum and based on those results make
the necessary modifications
Conduct further research to find a place to produce the stoves for the traders.
Possibly metal workers in the area could make them and sell them to the traders.
Hold a cook-off with the improved stove and their open fires so that they can see
firsthand how the Estufa Finca stove is more efficient and it will bring people to
their stalls which could mean more sales for them.
This option is an appropriate cooking solution , with modifications, for the short
and long term
Engage with community forums like SNACS to make communicating with the
traders easier.

7.2 Implement alternative stove designs

7.2.1 Brick fireplace (Braai)

More likely to be accepted by the traders as it is very similar to the cooking

methods they currently use
This option is an appropriate cooking solution for the long term
Build a chimney on the fireplace

7.2.2 Rocket Stove

Traders suggested a similar design

Not as efficient as the Estufa Finca stove but does solve some of the problems at
hand
This option is an appropriate cooking solution , with modifications, for the short
and long term

7.3 Construct area for wood and waste storage

Provide one area for waste storage

Page | 26

Provide one area for wood storage. Perhaps a bin or container.

The waste and wood storage must be regulated to ensure they do not accept
more wood than they can use (do not want wood to rot) and that the ash is
placed in the waste bags and collected to avoid an ash buildup as is occurring
currently on site.
Ash could be sent to the Etafeni Center (Sihume Road, Nyanga) to be used as
fertilizer. The ash needs to be transported to their site in Nyanga. Can contact
Stephanie Kilroe' stephanie@intermail.co.za to arrange this.

7.4 Connection to appropriate water pipes

In the long-term, setup a connection to the wastewater pipes so as to avoid the

dirty water from the cooking poisoning the environment.

8. References

Page | 27

Bank, W., 2014. Clean and Improved Cooking in Sub-Saharan Africa, Washington: s.n.
Himalayan Institute, 2013. Carpentry School Expansion: Help us grow.. [Online]
Available at: https://www.himalayaninstitute.org/2013/05/10/carpentry-schoolexpansion-help-us-grow/
[Accessed 2 February 2016].
James, L., 2010. Building SeaChar.org's Estufa Finca 5 Gallon BioChar Farm Stove,
s.l.: s.n.
Regenold, S., 2009. Wood-Burning Camp Stove. [Online]
Available at: https://gearjunkie.com/wood-burning-camp-stove
[Accessed 2 February 2016].
Ternes, T. B. ,. S. D. A., 2011. Estufa Finca- Santos Piolt Project, s.l.: s.n.
TradeIndia.com, 2016. Biomass Stove For Cooking. [Online]
Available at: http://www.tradeindia.com/fp1178865/Biomass-Stove-For-Cooking.html
[Accessed 2 February 2016].
Wartluft, J. L., 1975. DOUBLE-DRUM SAWDUST STOVE , s.l.: United States
Department of Agriculture .

9. Appendices

Page | 28

9.1 Anglo American Risk Matrix

9.2 Health and climate impact of various cooking technologies

Page | 29

Figure 9.1: Figure showing the climate and health impacts

of various cooking stoves (World Bank, 2014).

9.3 Photographs of the braai stove test

Page | 30

9.4

Photographs of the Estufa

Finca stove test

Page | 31