<table><caption>Table 6: Calorific value and expected combustion tests in the combustion chamber</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Humidity level in the combustion chamber (%)</th><th rowspan="2">Calorific value measured in the combustion chamber (MJ/kg)</th><th colspan="4">Expected combustion tests in the combustion chamber</th></tr><tr><th>Burn time (minutes)</th><th>Mass of fuel before combustion (grams)</th><th>Post-combustion fuel mass (grams)</th><th>Mass losses (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>23.08±02.52</td><td>28.15±02.53</td><td>15.24 ± 01.66</td><td>12.71±08.55</td><td>01.77±00.58</td><td>86.07±07.97</td></tr></tbody></table>

The thermal efficiency in terms of smoke emission, fuel economy and energy production capacity is presented in the following table:

<table><caption>Table 7: Qualitative characteristics of the product efficiency of improved ecological hearth-ovens</caption><thead><tr><th>CARACTERISTICS</th><th>ELEMENTS OF PERFORMANCE</th><th>MEDIUM FIREPLACE MODEL</th><th>LARGE FIREPLACE MODEL</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Fuel used</td><td></td><td>Combustible waste, wood, coal</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Fuel economy*for</td><td>Boiling for liquid (e.g. water)</td><td>22% - 49%</td><td>35% - 40%</td></tr><tr><td>Controlled cooking 1*</td><td>20% - 55%</td><td>35% - 40%</td></tr><tr><td>Controlled cooking 2*</td><td>25% - 45%</td><td>25% - 40%</td></tr><tr><td>Energy efficiency (effective use of heat)</td><td>20% - 30%</td><td>35% - 40%</td></tr><tr><td>Thermal efficiency</td><td></td><td>35% - 50%</td><td>35% - 45%</td></tr><tr><td>Smoke emission (CO/CO2)</td><td></td><td>0,04</td><td>0,04</td></tr><tr><td>Savings through time saving and compared to the 3-stone hearth used for cooking:</td><td></td><td>10% - 25%</td><td>10% - 25%</td></tr><tr><td>Speed of production</td><td></td><td>Excellent</td><td>Very good</td></tr><tr><td>Ability to control the intensity of the fire using all types of solid fuels</td><td></td><td>Excellent</td><td>Very good</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Easy ignition using:</td><td>Combustible waste</td><td>Very good</td><td>Very good</td></tr><tr><td>Wood</td><td>Good</td><td>Good</td></tr><tr><td>Coal</td><td>Very good</td><td>Very good</td></tr><tr><td>Combustible waste</td><td>Very good</td><td>Very good</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Versatility</td><td>Wood</td><td>Very good</td><td>Very good</td></tr><tr><td>Coal</td><td>Very good</td><td>Very good</td></tr><tr><td>Combustible waste</td><td>Very good</td><td>Good</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Easy extinguishing using</td><td>Wood</td><td>Good</td><td>Very good</td></tr><tr><td>Coal</td><td>Good</td><td>Good</td></tr><tr><td>Combustible waste</td><td>Very good</td><td>Very good</td></tr><tr><td>Wood</td><td>Very good</td><td>Very good</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Cleanliness using:</td><td>Coal</td><td>Very good</td><td>Very good</td></tr><tr><td>Combustible waste</td><td>Very good</td><td>Very good</td></tr><tr><td>Wood</td><td>Very good</td><td>Very good</td></tr><tr><td>Sustainability</td><td></td><td>Excellent</td><td>Excellent</td></tr><tr><td>Expected production location</td><td></td><td>Far North, North Cameroon<br>Other Sub-Saharan African countries</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Production capacity (Households / month / craftsman)</td><td></td><td>25-30</td><td>30-50</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Price</td><td>Simple, without air pollution control chimney but without integrated electricity production system</td><td>3,500 à 4,000 F.CFA</td><td>5,500 à 10,000 F.CFA</td></tr><tr><td>With air purification chimney but without integrated electricity production system</td><td>5,500 à 10,000 F.CFA</td><td>15,500 à 50,000 F.CFA</td></tr><tr><td>With air purification chimney and integrated electricity production system</td><td>25,500 à 50,000 F.CFA</td><td>75,500 à 250,000 F.CFA</td></tr></tbody></table>

<footnote>(*) Fuel savings compared to the 3-stone hearth</footnote>

<footnote>(1*) Controlled cooking for foods requiring short and medium cooking times</footnote>

<footnote>(2*) Controlled cooking for foods requiring long simmering times</footnote>
To maintain a stable and continuous flame, the humidity level must be less than or equal to 65% while the typical combustion temperature for fixed bed technological processes is between 850 and 1400 °C (Jenkins et al., 1998; Sjaak van, 2002; Takali, 2015). Furthermore, Takali (2015) indicates that in fluidized beds, the heat output can be higher and suitable for large installations. Thus, in order not to vitrify the bed material, it is necessary to reduce and maintain the temperature at a lower level by constituting the bed with silica sand, limestone grains or dolomite. For the combustion chamber of our device, we hope to proceed to place in turn:

* ✓ the ash pan (10 cm high);

* ✓ the sand 3 to 5 cm thick (silica);

* ✓ the gravel 3 to 5 cm thick (limestone);

* ✓ the stack of fuels 25 to 30 cm high (combustible waste, wood, coals, etc.)

<figure><img src="image_155.png" /><figcaption>Figure 8: Dimensions of improved stoves produced by SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING FOR COMMUNITIES</figcaption></figure>

Thus, the relatively expected overall combustion temperature in the combustion chamber would be lower and between 300 and 700 °C

The ease of ignition of fuels in the combustion chamber is governed by an average ignition temperature of (33.85± 05.86°C) and an average temperature at t=25 min of (498± 46.61°C).
<table><caption>Table 8: Ease of ignition and energy efficiency of combustion chambers</caption><thead><tr><th colspan="3">Ease of ignition of fuels in the combustion chamber</th><th colspan="2">Energy efficiency of combustion chambers</th></tr><tr><th>Ignition temperature (°C)</th><th>Temperature at t=5 min (°C)</th><th>Temperature at t=25 min (°C)</th><th>Start of heating of the combustion chambers after ignition (min)</th><th>Combustion chamber warm-up time (min)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>33.85±05.86</td><td>58.95±04.76</td><td>498±46.61</td><td>02.61±00.64</td><td>12.48±01.96</td></tr></tbody></table>

The energy efficiency of the combustion chambers is governed by an average start of heating of the combustion chambers after ignition of 02.61±00.64 minutes and an average heating time of the combustion chambers 12.48±01.96 min.

But, at the time when the start of combustion in the combustion chamber would be difficult, due to exogenous factors to the hearth-furnace, we will adopt the co-combustion of waste-based fuels with coal, because the co-combustion of biomass with coal is the most economical method for their energy recovery because it requires minimal modifications (Dzokom et al., 2024 a and b; Dzokom et al., 2022; Veringa and Takali, 2015). According to the arrangement of fuels in the carbonization stack, in the combustion chamber for better efficiency, the fuels can be arranged in three types of stacks, namely: vertical stack, horizontal stack and improved stack (Schenkel et al., 1997). The average usable energy yield when arranging wood in an improved carbonization stack is lower (60.32±0.04%) while the usable energy yield when arranging ecological charcoal based on *Eichhornia crassipes*, arranged in an improved carbonization stack (99.92±0.13%) after using 1 mg of fuel. Generally, ecological charcoal wastes less energy than wood if the usable energy obtained from a quantity of wood used directly is lower than the usable energy obtained from the same quantity of biomass transformed into charcoal. The useful thermal efficiency of wood is on average 8% and can even drop to 5% with the very widespread African three-stone hearth, while that of charcoal reaches an average of 28% (Keita, 1983; Keita, 1987).

<table><caption>Table 9: Expected energy yields from the arrangement of fuels in a carbonization pile</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2"></th><th colspan="4">Expected energy yields from the arrangement of wood in carbonization mills</th><th colspan="4">Expected energy yields from the disposal of ecological charcoal based on <i>Eichhornia crassipes</i>, arranged in a carbonization mill</th></tr><tr><th>Calorific value inferieur (kWh.kg<sup>-1</sup>)</th><th>Initial mass (kg)</th><th>Ash mass (kg)</th><th>Usable energy yield (%)</th><th>Calorific value inferieur (kWh.kg<sup>-1</sup>)</th><th>Initial mass (kg)</th><th>Ash mass (kg)</th><th>Usable energy yield (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Vertical grinding wheel</td><td>5.93±0.06</td><td>1</td><td>0.284±0.016</td><td>47.44±0.65</td><td>5.84±0.72</td><td>1</td><td>00.555±0.062</td><td>96.35±0.25</td></tr><tr><td>Horizontal grinding wheel</td><td>4.53±0.69</td><td>1</td><td>0.288±0.084</td><td>36.24±0.92</td><td>4.25±0.83</td><td>1</td><td>00.325±0.042</td><td>91.19±0.05</td></tr><tr><td>Improved grinding wheel</td><td>7.54±0.22</td><td>1</td><td>0.305±0.032</td><td>60.32±0.04</td><td>6.79±0.54</td><td>1</td><td>00.859±0.091</td><td>99.92±0.13</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$1 \text{ kWh.kg}^{-1} = 3.6 \text{ MJ.kg}^{-1} = 3600 \text{ kJ.kg}^{-1}$$
The average mass of ash when placing wood in an improved carbonization pile is lower (305±32 mg) while the average mass of ash when placing ecological charcoal based on *Eichhornia crassipes*, placed in an improved carbonization pile (859±91 mg) after the combustion of 1000 mg of fuel.

A cooking test with 1 kg of ecological charcoal based on *Eichhornia crassipes* produces a post-combustion mass (ash) of 14.36±0.22 milligrams/kilogram, i.e. an average mass loss of 86.75±0.01% (Dzokom et al., 2024a).

**NB:** We are using the notion of pile here because we believe that the arrangement of fuels in the combustion chamber must comply with that of the carbonization piles for a good start of combustion and optimal efficiency of the system. In this work, we will adopt the improved stack fuel arrangement which consists of arranging large-caliber fuels in the center of the combustion chamber, surrounding it with medium- and then small-caliber fuels. By definition, the P.C.S. as well as the P.C.I. can be related to the green matter by the formula (Doat and Valette, 1981).:

The moisture content in the combustion chamber before ignition, the calorific value of the dry matter and the moisture uptake rate of the ash in the combustion chamber after 24 hours are higher in the other improved hearths_furnaces than in the hearth_furnace of SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING FOR COMMUNITIES while the moisture content of the dry matter and the calorific value of the dry matter at 30% humidity are higher in the hearth_furnace of SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING FOR COMMUNITIES than in the other Hearths_furnaces

<table><caption>Table 10: Calorific value of the material according to the water content</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th></th><th>Moisture content in the combustion chamber before ignition (%)</th><th>Ash humidity recovery in the combustion chamber after 24 hours (%)</th><th>Moisture content of dry material (%)</th><th>Calorific value of dry matter (kwh.kg<sup>-1</sup>)</th><th>Calorific value of the dry material at 30% humidity (kwh.kg<sup>-1</sup>)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="4">Improved fireplace SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING FOR COMMUNITIES</td><td>Charcoal</td><td>25.66±0.13</td><td>11.53±0.66</td><td>18.21±0.43</td><td>4.034±0.101</td><td>2.634±0.541</td></tr><tr><td>Ecological Charcoal</td><td>21.31±0.36</td><td>09.44±0.54</td><td>15.85±0.12</td><td>6.265±0.425</td><td>5.626±0.115</td></tr><tr><td>Ecological Briquette</td><td>20.52±0.24</td><td>10.43±0.44</td><td>16.31±0.55</td><td>6.143±0.133</td><td>4.653±0.765</td></tr><tr><td>Charcoal</td><td>26.29±0.87</td><td>16.77±0.32</td><td>15.85±0.12</td><td>5.248±0.559</td><td>2.548±0.219</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Improved fireplace_oven</td><td>Ecological Charcoal</td><td>25.62±0.59</td><td>15.54±0.32</td><td>15.33±0.67</td><td>5.895±0.524</td><td>5.504±0.901</td></tr><tr><td>Ecological Briquette</td><td>20.02±0.64</td><td>10.92±0.64</td><td>17.38±0.02</td><td>5.635±0.234</td><td>3.575±0.125</td></tr></tbody></table>

Following studies conducted on a series of forest species from the South and East of the USA, a classification of forest fuels into four categories according to their higher calorific value has been proposed (Hough, 1969 and Valette, 1981):
* P.C. less than 4,000 cal/g (16.7 kJ/g);

* P.C.S. between 4,000 and 4,500 cal/g (16.7 and 18.8 kJ/g);

* P.C.S. between 4,500 and 5,000 cal/g (18.8 and 20.9 kJ/g);

* P.C.S. greater than 5,000 cal/g (20.9 kJ/g).

## 2-7- Decontamination of fumes and toxic pollutants in the air

As part of this work, purifying the fumes that could be emitted by the hearth-furnace involves designing a small absorbent filter that will have the capacity to retain all acidic, basic or simply toxic pollutants from the combustion of fuels.

### 2-7-1- Characteristics of the manufacturing materials of the "pleated cartridge filter" of fumes

The average pitch between the two peaks is 0.22±0.04 µm, and the average pleat height is 0.29±0.03 µm. From Darcy's law, gas flow modeling has determined that the average solid volume fraction of the media is 0.29±0.02 µm3, and the average fiber radius is 0.052±0.002 µm.

<table><caption>Table 12: Sizing and permeability models (empirical model, flow through a random arrangement of fibers)</caption><thead><tr><th colspan="2">Distance between two neighboring fold peaks</th><th colspan="2">Sizing and permeability models (empirical model, flow through a random arrangement of fibers, α < 0.25)</th></tr><tr><th>Pitch (μm)</th><th>Ply height (μm)</th><th>Solid volume fraction of the media (μm³)</th><th>Fiber radius (μm)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.22±0.04</td><td>0.29±0.03</td><td>0.29±0.02</td><td>0.052±0.002</td></tr></tbody></table>

According to Laurence (2006), filter cartridges are made of pleated fibrous media placed in a cylindrical shape, while cassettes are flat pleated filters. Although there are other types of filters based on non-woven fibrous media ("depth" cartridge filters, flat filters), pleated filters are by far the most used (Colin, 2013).

<figure><img src="image_156.png" /><figcaption>Photo 1: Woven fibrous media observed by scanning electron microscopy
(Laurence, 2006)</figcaption></figure>
According to this author (Colin, 2013), for equivalent space requirements, pleating makes it possible to obtain filtration surfaces more than 10 times greater than flat filters and two geometric quantities are generally used to characterize them: the distance between two neighboring pleat peaks: the pitch, p and the pleat height, h.

<figure><img src="image_157.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 9: Geometric characterization of pleated filters by pitch and pleat height (Colin, 2013).**</figcaption></figure>

During Brownian diffusion, the average particle transport speed by convection is 0.057±0.008 m.s⁻¹, the average transport speed by diffusion is 0.0041±0.0007 m².s⁻¹ with a Peclet number of 0.931±0.064. During diffusion by direct interception, the particle diameter is 0.138±0.092µm, the fiber diameter is 0.246±0.062µm with a direct interception ratio of 0.561±0.051.

<table><caption>**Table 13: Brownian diffusion and direct interception diffusion**</caption><thead><tr><th colspan="3">Brownian diffusion for particle size dp &lt; 1 µm</th><th colspan="3">Direct interception scattering for dp &gt; 0.1 µm</th></tr><tr><th>Convection<br>particle transport<br>velocity U0 (m.s<sup>-1</sup>)</th><th>Diffusion<br>transport<br>velocity dp<br>(m<sup>2</sup>.s<sup>-1</sup>)</th><th>Peclet<br>number (Pe)</th><th>Particle<br>diameter<br>(µm)</th><th>Fiber<br>diameter<br>(µm)</th><th>Direct<br>Interception<br>Report</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.057±0.008</td><td>0.0041±0.0007</td><td>0.931±0.064</td><td>0.138±0.092</td><td>0.246±0.062</td><td>0.561±0.051</td></tr></tbody></table>

Due to collisions with gas molecules, particles of dimensions smaller than or equivalent to the mean free path of gas molecules (λ=0.067 µm for air) travel a random oscillating trajectory which considerably increases the probability of interception by the fibers (Laurence, 2006). The interception collection mechanism is independent of speed; it depends only on the geometry of the particles and is described by the ratio between the particle diameter and the fiber diameter (Colin, 2013).

During diffusion by inertial impaction, the kinetic energy of the particles is 0.0104±0.0003 m.s⁻¹, the energy dissipated by friction with the fluid is 0.0458±0.0033 m.s⁻¹ with the Stokes Number of 0.986±0.022, while the sedimentation of particles with a diameter of less than 10 µm is 0.057±0.008 mg/µm
<table><caption>Table 14: Diffusion by inertial impaction and sedimentation of particles</caption><thead><tr><th colspan="3">Inertial impaction diffusion for dp > 1 µm</th><th rowspan="2">Sedimentation (sieving) for<br>particles with a diameter of less<br>than 10 µm (mg/µm)</th></tr><tr><th>Kinetic energy of the<br>particle (m.s<sup>-1</sup>)</th><th>Energy dissipated by friction<br>with the fluid (m.s<sup>-1</sup>)</th><th>Stokes<br>number (St)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.0104±0.0003</td><td>0.0458±0.0033</td><td>0.986±0.022</td><td>0.057±0.008</td></tr></tbody></table>

Large particles (dp > 1µm), due to their inertia, tend to leave the carrier gas flow lines and follow straight trajectories (Colin, 2013). Sedimentation (sieving), generally neglected for particles with a diameter of less than 10 µm, is the predominant capture mechanism when the particles have a size greater than or equal to the characteristic pore size of the fibrous media (Colin, (2013)). When evaluating particle collection efficiency, the average fraction of injected air is 20.36±2.82L/min with a total average quantity of injected fluorescent particles of 13.92±0.74 L/min.

<table><caption>Table 15: Particle collection efficiency and performance of fibrous media in filtration</caption><thead><tr><th colspan="2">Collection yield</th><th colspan="2">Performance of fibrous media in filtration</th></tr><tr><th>Fraction of injected air<br>(L/min)</th><th>Total quantity of fluorescent particles injected<br>(L/min)</th><th>Collection efficiency (E)<br>(L/min)</th><th>Pressure loss (ΔP)<br>(L/min)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>20.36±2.82</td><td>13.92±0.74</td><td>20.01±0.08</td><td>0.23±0.05</td></tr></tbody></table>

A "good filter" must have a low pressure drop and high efficiency (Colin, 2013). When evaluating the performance of fibrous media in filtration, the collection efficiency is 0.21±0.08 L/min while the pressure drop 0.023±0.005 L/min.).

### 2-7-2- Analysis of particles collected by smoke filters of improved stoves

When analyzing the particles collected by smoke filters of improved stoves, the evaluation of the collection efficiency with the acid gas treatment filter indicates that CO₂ (67.10±0.63%) and (NH₄)HCO₃ (16.33±0.121%) were better filtered with the SAHEL NATURE stove. Na₂CO (09.77±02.77%) was better filtered with the improved ceramic stove while water vapor (H₂O, 14.54±0.54%) was better filtered with the Malagasy/Nigerian stove.

<table><caption>Table 16: Analysis of particles collected by smoke filters of improved stoves</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Type of fireplace</th><th colspan="4">Collection efficiency with acid gas treatment filter (%)</th><th colspan="4">Collection efficiency with the alkaline gas treatment filter (%)</th></tr><tr><th>CO<sub>2</sub></th><th>(NH<sub>4</sub>)HCO<sub>3</sub></th><th>Na<sub>2</sub>CO</th><th>H<sub>2</sub>O</th><th>CO<sub>2</sub></th><th>NaCO<sub>3</sub></th><th>N<sub>2</sub></th><th>H<sub>2</sub>O</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Improved fireplace SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING FOR COMMUNITIES</td><td>67.10±0.63<br>a</td><td>16.33±01.2<br>a</td><td>06.75±00.7<br>b</td><td>09.82±0.32<br>a</td><td>71.91±0.13<br>a</td><td>07.16±0.03<br>c</td><td>07.61±00.3<br>a</td><td>13.32±00.3<br>b</td></tr><tr><td>Malagasy/Nigerian Fireplace</td><td>65.32±0.16<br>a</td><td>11.43±02.0<br>b</td><td>08.71±06.3<br>a</td><td>14.54±0.54<br>d</td><td>62.76±0.54<br>c</td><td>07.32±0.16<br>a</td><td>10.42±03.5<br>4a</td><td>19.65±00.1<br>3a</td></tr><tr><td>Improved Metal Fireplace</td><td>65.01±0.39<br>a</td><td>14.54±02.2<br>b</td><td>07.62±01.3<br>a</td><td>12.83±0.72<br>a</td><td>68.05±0.69<br>b</td><td>07.01±0.39<br>a</td><td>13.00±02.0<br>4a</td><td>11.94±00.1<br>7a</td></tr><tr><td>Improved Ceramic Fireplace</td><td>66.06±0.04<br>a</td><td>15.37±00.5<br>b</td><td>09.77±02.7<br>a</td><td>08.80±0.54<br>a</td><td>69.13±0.25<br>a</td><td>07.06±0.48<br>b</td><td>15.23±02.0<br>8a</td><td>8.58±00.64<br>c</td></tr></tbody></table>
The evaluation of the collection efficiency with the alkaline gas treatment filter indicates that CO₂ (71.91±0.13%) was better filtered with the SAHEL NATURE hearth and 07.32±0.16% of NaCO₃ was better filtered with the Malagasy/Nigerian hearth. 15.23±02.08% of N₂ was better filtered with the improved ceramic hearth while 19.65±00.13% of water vapor (H₂O) was better filtered with the Malagasy/Nigerian hearth.

## 2-8- Fuel economy and energy autonomy of improved stoves

Of the five types of stove, the highest fuel economy is that of the SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING stove (61.07±03.09%) with 0.716±0.093kg of charcoal produced, while the lowest is that of the three-legged stove (10.02±03.16%) with 0.327±0.136 kg of charcoal produced.

<table><caption>Table 17: Energy efficiency of carbonization in the combustion chamber</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Type of fireplace</th><th colspan="3">Fuel economy of improved stoves</th><th colspan="3">Energy autonomy of improved stoves</th></tr><tr><th>Initial mass of wood (kg)</th><th>Mass of charcoal produced Mba (kg)</th><th>Wood saving (%)</th><th>Maximum heat obtained in the combustion chamber (°C)</th><th>Heat retention time ≥ 100 °C (minutes)</th><th>Heat used (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Improved fireplace SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING FOR COMMUNITIES</td><td>01±0.32<sup>a,d</sup></td><td>0.716±0.093<sup>a</sup></td><td>61.07±03.09<sup>a</sup></td><td>761.31±30.66<sup>a</sup></td><td>29.76±0.22<sup>a</sup></td><td>31.91±0.13<sup>a</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Three stone fireplace</td><td>01±0.51<sup>a</sup></td><td>0.327±0.136<sup>b</sup></td><td>10.02±03.16<sup>a</sup></td><td>480.11±13.54<sup>a</sup></td><td>11.07±0.37<sup>d</sup></td><td>12.76±0.54<sup>b</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Malagasy/Nigerian Fireplace</td><td>01±0.02<sup>a</sup></td><td>0.701±0.390<sup>b</sup></td><td>30.01±03.09<sup>a</sup></td><td>750.43±11.76<sup>b</sup></td><td>28.07±0.85<sup>a</sup></td><td>18.05±0.69<sup>a</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Improved Metal Fireplace</td><td>01±0.04<sup>c</sup></td><td>0.706±0.048<sup>c</sup></td><td>55.06±04.08<sup>c</sup></td><td>779.54±64.71<sup>a</sup></td><td>28.05±0.41<sup>a</sup></td><td>29.13±0.25<sup>c</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Improved Ceramic Fireplace</td><td>01±0.53<sup>b</sup></td><td>0.712±0.014<sup>a</sup></td><td>60.02±01.04<sup>a</sup></td><td>871.02±58.32<sup>a</sup></td><td>28.07±0.06<sup>c</sup></td><td>31.85±0.44<sup>a</sup></td></tr></tbody></table>

The observation of the energy autonomy of improved stoves made it possible to observe that the maximum heat obtained in the combustion chamber (871.02±58.32°C) was observed in the ceramic stove, improved the maximum heat retention time greater than 100°C in the combustion chamber was observed with the SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING stove (29.76±0.22 minutes) with a maximum heat used of 31.91±0.13%.

### 2-8-1- Socio-economic impact and acceptability of improved stoves in households

During the analysis of the socio-economic impacts of improved stoves in households, it appears that users noted a high smoke emission with the three-legged stove (80.1±0.5%) while low smoke emission was noted with the SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING stove (30.1±0.2%). At the end of the survey, 99.37±0.16% of respondents say that the traditional three-legged stove is more accessible than improved stoves, but among the improved stoves studied, the SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING stove is more accessible at 71.06±0.93%. Fuel savings were better observed on the SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING stove (76.01±02.33%) with the best saving in cooking time (85.54±01.48%).
The observation and analysis of the energy autonomy of improved stoves by users allowed their responses concerning the maximum heat obtained in the combustion chamber which is better with the SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING stove (87.71±03.56%) which also has a better heat retention time (95.55±06.77%). However, the most used heat in households is that of traditional African three-legged stoves due to its high accessibility rate and the weight of cooking habits.

At the beginning, for the popularization of improved stoves, the dissemination system set up by SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING FOR COMMUNITIES consisted of opening a store for the project, which should be run by a facilitator designated by the promoters of the project. In addition, it was integrated with advertising programs (radio, billboards, etc.). Then, cooking demonstrations in the neighborhoods, in associations and health centers and meetings, sketches in high schools and training centers, street and market animations, reinforced this popularization program. Quality control and training in the management of facilitators and artisans were ensured and, to encourage producers of improved stoves, initially, the purchase of the majority of the production was carried out by the project in line with the project's subsidy policy.

<table><caption>Table 18: Acceptability rate of improved stoves in households</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Type of fireplace</th><th colspan="4">Fuel economy of improved stoves</th><th colspan="3">Energy autonomy of improved stoves</th></tr><tr><th>Smoke emission (%)</th><th>Affordability (%)</th><th>Fuel savings (%)</th><th>Cooking time savings (%)</th><th>Maximum heat obtained in the combustion chamber (%)</th><th>Heat retention time (%)</th><th>Heat used (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Improved fireplace SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING FOR COMMUNITIES</td><td>30.1±0.2<sup>a</sup></td><td>71.06±0.93<sup>a</sup></td><td>76.01±02.33<sup>a</sup></td><td>85.54±01.48<sup>a</sup></td><td>87.71±03.56<sup>a</sup></td><td>95.55±06.77<sup>a</sup></td><td>91.87±03.13<sup>a</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Three stone fireplace</td><td>80.1±0.5<sup>a</sup></td><td>99.37±0.16<sup>d</sup></td><td>10.52±04.62<sup>b</sup></td><td>13.43±02.11<sup>c</sup></td><td>80.41±03.54<sup>a</sup></td><td>51.08±02.84<sup>b</sup></td><td>98.76±07.54<sup>b</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Malagasy/Nigerian Fireplace</td><td>40.1±0.2<sup>h</sup></td><td>70.01±0.39<sup>e</sup></td><td>70.31±02.86<sup>c</sup></td><td>80.76±03.44<sup>a</sup></td><td>82.23±01.88<sup>b</sup></td><td>88.27±05.85<sup>a</sup></td><td>88.05±0.69<sup>a</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Improved Metal Fireplace</td><td>34.1±0.4<sup>d</sup></td><td>70.06±0.68<sup>b</sup></td><td>72.59 ±02.59<sup>a</sup></td><td>82.43±01.33<sup>b</sup></td><td>83.65±02.67<sup>c</sup></td><td>87.55±06.74<sup>c</sup></td><td>90.99±01.44<sup>c</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Improved Ceramic Fireplace</td><td>38.6±0.3<sup>c</sup></td><td>70.12±0.94<sup>a</sup></td><td>75.43±05.66<sup>b</sup></td><td>83.43±01.34<sup>d</sup></td><td>83.72±03.58<sup>a</sup></td><td>87.87±06.06<sup>d</sup></td><td>91.68±03.65<sup>a</sup></td></tr></tbody></table>

Completed around mid-2022, the first phase of the project planned for the production and marketing system to be autonomous from the project. This type of stove is being disseminated in other African countries.
<figure><img src="image_158.png" /><figcaption>Photo 2: Project for the dissemination of improved stoves in Maroua-Cameroon</figcaption></figure>

This was followed by waves of improved stoves from various other countries and various other projects.

## CONCLUSION

The objective here is to propose conceptual models of improved stoves capable of saving fuels and increasing the energy autonomy of culinary stoves. In the Far North of Cameroon, the cities that have benefited greatly from projects related to improved stoves are Maroua, Mokolo, Mora, Yagoua, Kaélé, Maga and Kousseri. The average humidity rate in the combustion chamber is 23.08±02.52% and the calorific value measured in the combustion chamber is 28.15±02.53MJ/kg. During the expected combustion tests in the combustion chamber, the average mass of the fuel before combustion was observed to be 12.71±08.55 gr, with an average mass of the post-combustion fuel of 01.77±00.58 gr and mass losses of 86.07±07.97% during an average combustion time of 15.24 ± 1.66 minutes. The ease of ignition of fuels in the combustion chamber is governed by an average ignition temperature of (33.85± 05.86°C) and an average temperature at t=25 min of (498± 46.61°C). The energy efficiency of the combustion chambers is governed by an average start of heating of the combustion chambers after ignition of 02.61±00.64 minutes and an average heating time of the combustion chambers 12.48±01.96 min. The average mass of ash when placing wood in an improved carbonization pile is lower (305±32 mg) while the average mass of ash when placing ecological charcoal based on *Eichhornia crassipes*, placed in an improved carbonization pile (859±91 mg) after the combustion of 1000 mg of fuel.

The average particle transport velocity by convection from the combustion chambers to the filters is 0.057±0.008 m.s⁻¹ and the average diffusion transport velocity from the
combustion chambers to the filters is 0.0041±0.0007 m².s⁻¹ with a direct particle interception ratio by the filters of 0.561±0.051. The kinetic energy of the particles is 0.0104±0.0003 m.s⁻¹, the energy dissipated by friction with the fluids is 0.0458±0.0033 m.s⁻¹ with the Stokes number of 0.986±0.022, while the sedimentation of particles with a diameter of less than 10 µm is 0.057±0.008 mg/µm. When evaluating the particle collection efficiency, the average fraction of injected air is 20.36±2.82L/min with an average total amount of injected fluorescent particles of 13.92±0.74 L/min while the collection efficiency is 0.21±0.08 L/min while the pressure drop 0.023±0.005 L/min.). When analyzing the particles collected by the smoke filters of the improved stoves, the evaluation of the collection efficiency with the acid gas treatment filter indicates that CO₂ (67.10±0.63%) and (NH₄) HCO₃ (16.33±0.12%) were better filtered with the SAHEL NATURE stove. Na₂CO₃ (99.77±0.27%) was better filtered with the improved ceramic hearth while water vapor (H₂O, 14.54±0.54%) was better filtered with the Malagasy/Nigerian hearth while the collection efficiency with the alkaline gas treatment filter indicates that CO₂ (71.91±0.13%) was better filtered with the SAHEL NATURE Hearth and 07.32±0.16% of Na₂CO₃ was better filtered with the Malagasy/Nigerian hearth. 15.23±0.08% of N₂ was better filtered with the improved ceramic hearth while 19.65±0.13% of water vapor (H₂O) was better filtered with the Malagasy/Nigerian hearth. Of the five types of stoves, the highest fuel economy is that of the SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING stove (61.07±0.09%) with 0.716±0.093 kg of charcoal produced, while the lowest is that of the three-legged stove (10.02±0.16%) with 0.327±0.136 kg of charcoal produced, while the observation of the energy autonomy of the improved stoves allowed us to observe that the maximum heat obtained in the combustion chamber (871.02±58.32°C) was observed in the ceramic stove, improved the maximum heat retention time greater than 100°C in the combustion chamber was observed with the SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING stove (29.76±0.22 minutes) with a maximum heat used of 31.91±0.13%. When analyzing the socio-economic impacts of improved stoves in households, it appears that users noted a high smoke emission with the three-legged stove (80.1±0.5%) while low smoke emission was noted with the SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING stove (30.1±0.2%). At the end of the survey, 99.37±0.16% of respondents say that the traditional three-legged stove is more accessible than improved stoves, but among the improved stoves studied, the SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING stove is more accessible at 71.06±0.93%. Fuel economy was better observed on the SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING stove (76.01±0.23%) with the best saving in cooking time (85.54±0.48%).

The observation and analysis of the energy autonomy of the improved stoves by the users allowed their responses concerning the maximum heat obtained in the combustion chamber which is better with the SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING stove (87.71±0.56%) which also has a better heat retention time (95.55±0.77%). However,
the most used heat in households is that of traditional African three-legged stoves
because of its high accessibility rate and the weight of culinary habits.

Reference

Alexis DZOKOM. Valorisation energetique et environnementale des dechets papiers et cartons. Ingénierie de l'environnement. École Nationale Supérieure polytechnique de Maroua (Cameroun), 2021. Français. [NNT : ]. (tel-03624011)

Alexis DZOKOM, Ezechiel KODJI, Joël TIZE KODA, Roger DJOULDE DARMAN, 2024. Study of the Performance of Organic and Inorganic Binders for the Production of Ecological Charcoal Fuels Based on Dead Biomass of Azadirachta indica. GSJ: Volume 12, Issue 4, April 2024, Online ISSN 2320-9186. Pp 330-338 www.globalscientificjournal.com.

https://www.academia.edu/121767192/Study_of_the_Performance_of_Organic_an
d_Inorganic_Binders_for_the_Production_of_Ecological Charcoal Fuels Based on
Dead_Biomass_of_Azadirachta_indica

AKOUEHOU S. Gaston, SEGNON Alphonse, DUCLOS Larry, HOUNSOUNOU Léon C., GOUSSANOU A. Cédric, GBOZO Edouard, MENSAH Guy Apollinaire, 2012. Fiche Technique : Foyers améliorés recommandés pour des usages domestiques au Bénin de bois au Bénin, Bibliothèque National (BN) du Bénin, N° 6181, 2012, 5p.

ASTME711-87, 2004.Standard Test Method for Gross Calorific Value of Refuse-
Derived Fuel by the Bomb Calorimeter, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA,
2004 1987 www.astm.org

B. K. HOUGH, 1969. Basic Soils Engineering. Book. The Ronald Press Co, 1969. Pp
https://www.lostknowledgebookshop.com.au/product/basic-soils-engineering-by-
b-k-hough-the-ronald-press-co-1969/

Beatrix WESTHOFF, 1995. « Une des plus vieilles technologies du monde – du foyer ouvert aux micro-ondes » in *Foyers en Images: une documentation sur les foyers améliorés et traditionnels en Afrique, Asie et Amérique Latine*, 1. Edition française, Frankfurt am Main 1995, ISBN 3-86099-135-3, pp 18

BEMER, D., CALLE, S., THOMAS, D., SIMON, X. et APPERT-Collin, J. (2006). Filtration des aérosols - performances des médias filtrants. Hygiènes et sécurité du travail - Cahiers de notes documentaires, ND 2241(202):7-21.

BONIFAY, E. (1976) - Grottes du Mas des Caves (Lunel-Viel, Hérault), France , Livret guide C2, UISPP, p. 196-204.

DORST, D. (1960) - Transportable Herde in Afrika - dans le Jahrbuch des Museums für Völkerkunde zu Leibzig Band XVII/ 1958, Akademie-Verlag Berlin, P.140-157
DOAT J., 1982, « Les Foyers améliorés une solution possible pour atténuer la pénurie en bois de feu dans les pays du tiers monde » in *Revue Bois et Forêts des Tropiques*, n° 197, 3e trimestre 1982, pp. 45-59

DOAT J. et VALETTE J.Ch., 1977, Le pouvoir calorifique des bois tropicaux in *Revue Bois et Fos des Tropiques*, n°172, Mars - Avril 1977 pp 43-55.

DOAT J. et VALETTE J.Ch., 1980, L'inflammabilité de quelques bois tropicaux in *Revue Bois et Foreèts des Tropiques*, n°194, novembre - décembre 1980 pp 43-55.

DOAT J. et VALETTE J.Ch., 1981, Le pouvoir calorifique supérieur d'espèces forestières méditerranéennes *Ann. Sci. forest.*, Vol 38, N° 4 pp 469-486

El Hadji Lamine MBAYE, 2011. Fiche technique de fabrication des foyers améliorés « jambar » à bois et à charbon de bois. Universite Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar centre d'études et de recherche sur les energies renouvelables (C.E.R.E.R), Avril 2011. 10p

Ernest GALBRUN, Alain GLIERE, Yves FOUILLET, Jean-Luc ACHARD, Frédéric ROUILLON, et Christine PEPONNET. Mise au point d'un dispositif de collecte d'aérosols nanométriques pour l'analyse biologique. CFM 2007 - 18ème Congrès Français de Mécanique, Aug 2007, Grenoble, France. <https://hal.science/hal-00267663>

LUBOVICH, K. (2009). Working paper No. 5. Managing Transboundary Water Resources in the Lake Victoria Region.

Ramiro J. MARCH (1992) L'utilisation du bois dans les foyers préhistoriques: une approche expérimentale, Bulletin de la Société Botanique de France. Actualités Botaniques, 139:2-4, 245-253, DOI: 10.1080/01811789.1992.10827103.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01811789.1992.10827103

KEITA J.D., 1983. Bois ou charbon de bois: Quel est le meilleur combustible? Bureau régional de la FAO pour l'Afrique à Accra (Ghana). https://www.fao.org/4/s4550f/s4550f09.htm

KEITA, J.D., (1987). Wood or Charcoal—Which Is Better? Unasylva: An International Journal of Forestry and Forest Industries. Vol.39. FAO—Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. Richard Pardo (Ed.). http://www.fao.org/docrep/s4550e/s4550e09.htm

KLINGSHIRN A., 1995, « Les projets d'énergie domestique: réussites et réflexions » in *Foyers en Images: une documentation sur les foyers améliorés et traditionnels en Afrique, Asie et Amérique Latine*, 1. Edition française, Frankfurt am Main 1995, ISBN 3-86099-135-3, pp24-28
LE COQ Laurence, 2006, Élimination des particules, Techniques de l'ingénieur., Environnement-ISSN-1282-9080, 2006, vol. G1, n°G1710, (33 ref.), Techniques de l'ingénieur, Paris, FRANCE (19?) (Revue), ppG1710.1-G1710.12

Pierre-Colin GERVAIS. Études expérimentale et numérique du colmatage de filtre plissé. Autre. Université de Lorraine, 2013. Français. NNT : 2013LORR0007. tel-01749333. https://hal.univ-lorraine.fr/tel-01749333

Philipp SCHENKEL, Ravi SAMUDRALA, Jörg HINRICHS, 2013. Thermo-physical properties of semi-hard cheese made with different fat fractions: Influence of melting point and fat globule size. International Dairy Journal, Elsevier. Volume 30, Issue 2, June 2013, Pages 79-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2012.11.014

SHARMA, S.K. (1993) - Improved Solid Biomass Burning Cookstoves: A Development Manual - Bangkok, Thailand, FAO-RWEDPA, Field Document No.44, p. 4,5

SAHEL NATURE CONSULTING FOR COMMUNITIES (2023). Rapport Technique Final des Activités de Mise en Œuvre des Formations à l'Usage des Foyers Culinaires Ameliorés. V3, Phase 2. Maroua, 2023

Sabri TAKALI, 2015. Etude d'un électrobrûleur industriel doté d'une torche à arc triphasée pour la valorisation énergétique de combustibles à faible pouvoir calorifique. Génie chimique. Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Paris, 2015. Français. (NNT : 2015ENMP0071). (tel-01315556)

SOULEYMANE O., OVO S. F. A., AI HASANE F., CONAND H. K. et EDJIKEME E., 2020. Caractérisation thermique de combustible à base de sciure de bois : influence de l'empois d'amidon de manioc sur l'efficacité énergétique des biocharbons à base de sciure de bois ; Afrique SCIENCE 16(4) (2020) 123 - 131 123, ISSN 1813-548X, http://www.afriquescience.net

TOBIASSON, W. et COLL., 1991. « New wetting curves for common roof insulation », Proceedings of the international symposium on roofing technology, NRCA.

THOMAS, D. (2001). Étude de la filtration des aérosols par des filtres à fibres. Mémoire d'habilitation à diriger les recherches.

VALETTE J.Ch., 1988, Notions générales relatives à la combustion FEUX CONTRÔLES in forêt méditerranéenne, t. X, n• 1, juillet 1988, pp 197-201.

Van Der Geest SJAAK. Respect and reciprocity: care of elderly people in rural Ghana. J Cross Cult Gerontol. 2002;17(1):3-31. doi: 10.1023/a:1014843004627. PMID: 14617973.

VERINGA, H. (2016) New Basic Theory of Gravity. *Journal of Modern Physics*, *7*, 1818-1828. doi: [10.4236/jmp.2016.713162](https://doi.org/10.4236/jmp.2016.713162)
# EXERCISES AND CORRECTIONS ON ECOLOGICAL MODELING, FUEL ECONOMY, ENERGY AUTONOMY AND COMMUNITY ACCEPTABILITY OF IMPROVED STOVE-OVENS

## Exercise 1: Ecological Modeling of Improved Stoves_Ovens

**Question 1:** Explain the concept of ecological modeling in the context of improved cookstoves. What parameters are important to take into account?

**Question 2:** Use a simple model to estimate the reduction in CO₂ emissions when an improved Firewall_Four replaces a traditional fireplace. Suppose that the home

**Question 3:** Discuss additional ecological impacts to consider when evaluating the effectiveness of improved stoves.

**Correction 1:**

**Answer 1:**

Ecological modeling of improved stoves consists of simulating and analyzing the environmental and ecological impacts of stoves using mathematical and computer models. Important parameters include:

- **Pollutant emissions:** Quantity of CO₂, CO, NOx, and other pollutants emitted.

- **Energy efficiency:** Quantity of energy converted into useful heat in relation to the energy consumed.

- **Biomass consumption:** Quantity of fuel needed to produce one unit of heat.

- **Impact on deforestation:** Effect on local forest resources in terms of wood consumption.

**Answer 2:**

**To calculate the reduction in CO₂ emissions:**

Emissions saved per household=Traditional household emissions-Improved household emissions

Emissions saved per household=2-0.5=1.5 tons CO₂

**For 100 households:**
$$ \text{Emissions saved per household} = 1.5 \frac{\text{tons CO}_2}{\text{household}} \times 100 \text{households} = 150 \text{ tons CO}_2 $$

Thus, 150 tons of CO₂ will be saved per year.

**Answer 3:**

**Additional ecological impacts include:**

- **Reduction in deforestation:** Improved stoves consume less fuel, which reduces pressure on forest resources.

- **Indoor air quality:** Improvement of air quality inside homes, reducing the risk of respiratory diseases.

- **Waste management:** The management of ashes and other by-products can also influence ecological impacts.

- **Sustainability of materials:** The materials used to construct the improved stoves must be durable and not cause additional pollution.

**Exercise 2: Fuel Economy and Energy Autonomy**

**Question 1:** Analyze the economic benefits of using improved stoves versus traditional stoves in terms of fuel cost. Let's assume that the annual fuel cost for a traditional stove is $200 and for an improved stove is $120. What is the annual savings for a household using the improved stove?

**Question 2:** Discuss how the use of improved stoves can contribute to the energy autonomy of local communities.

**Question 3:** Assess the factors that may influence the adoption of improved cookstoves in rural communities.

**Correction 2:**

**Answer 1:**

**To calculate the annual savings:**

Annual saving=Cost of traditional fuel-Cost of improved fuel

Annual saving=200USD-120USD=80USD

A household using the improved stove will save $80 per year on fuel costs.

**Answer 2:**

**The use of improved stoves contributes to energy autonomy by:**
- **Reducing dependence:** Less fuel is required, reducing dependence on external or imported fuel sources.

- **Encouraging local solutions:** Improved cookstoves can be manufactured locally, creating jobs and promoting local innovation.

- **Optimizing the use of resources:** Improving energy efficiency allows better use of available local resources.

**Answer 3:**

**Factors influencing adoption include:**

- **Initial cost:** The purchase or construction price of improved stoves can be an obstacle for low-income households.

- **Awareness and training:** Knowledge of the benefits and training on the use of improved stoves are essential for successful adoption.

- **Accessibility of materials:** The availability of materials needed for the construction or repair of improved stoves may affect their adoption.

- **Cultural acceptability:** Cultural preferences and habits can influence the willingness of communities to adopt new technologies.

These exercises and answers provide a basis for understanding the ecological, economic and social aspects associated with improved stoves. They make it possible to assess the advantages and challenges linked to their adoption and their impact on energy sustainability.
# GLOSSARY ON ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION, MANAGEMENT OF PLANT RESOURCES FOR COOKING AND CLIMATE CHANGE

Here is a glossary covering concepts related to environmental education, management of plant resources for cooking, and climate change.

**-Adaptation:** Process of adjusting to current or expected climatic conditions to reduce damage or exploit beneficial opportunities.

**- Sustainable agriculture:** Agricultural practices that aim to produce food while respecting the environment, preserving natural resources and contributing to the fight against climate change.

**- Mitigation:** Actions taken to reduce or prevent greenhouse gas emissions with the aim of limiting the extent of climate change.

**- Biodiversity:** Variety of life forms on Earth, essential for ecosystems or Diversity of living species in an ecosystem. Conserving biodiversity is crucial to maintaining ecosystem services, including plant resources for cooking. Climate change can disrupt this diversity.

**- Cooking wood:** Plant resource used for cooking, especially in rural areas. Sustainable management of cooking wood is essential to avoid deforestation and CO₂ emissions.

**- Carbon balances:** Assessment of the total quantity of greenhouse gases emitted directly or indirectly by an activity, product or organization.

**- Climate change:** Long-term changes in the Earth's climate, primarily due to human activities, such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation.

**- Biomass fuel:** Materials of plant or animal origin used for energy production. Biomass can be a renewable source, but its use must be managed to avoid excessive greenhouse gas emissions.

**- Conservation of natural resources:** Set of practices aimed at protecting and managing natural resources, such as forests, soils, and water, to guarantee their sustainability.

**- Blue carbon:** Carbon captured by coastal and marine ecosystems, such as mangroves, salt marshes and seagrass beds.

**- Black carbon:** Soot particles resulting from the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels and biomass, which contribute to global warming.
**- Climate change:** Long-term changes in average temperatures and weather conditions on Earth, primarily caused by human activity.

**- Climate:** Average weather conditions observed over a long period of time, usually 30 years or more.

**- Deforestation:** Loss of forests, often due to the exploitation of wood for cooking or agriculture, which contributes to the loss of biodiversity and climate change. It is also the conversion of forest land to other uses, leading to the release of CO2 and loss of habitat.

**- Sustainable development:** Concept which aims to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs, by integrating economic, social and environmental aspects.

**- Environmental education:** Learning process that raises individuals' awareness of environmental issues, encouraging them to adopt responsible and sustainable behaviors.

**- Renewable energy:** Energy sources that renew themselves naturally, such as solar, wind, and hydro, and which are essential for reducing dependence on fossil fuels. It is also a naturally renewable energy source that emits little or no greenhouse gases (for example, solar, wind, hydroelectric).

**- Soil erosion:** Land degradation due to natural or human factors, often aggravated by inadequate land management and deforestation.

**- Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions:** Gases that trap heat in the Earth's atmosphere, contributing to global warming (e.g. carbon dioxide, methane).

**- Community forest:** Forest managed by a local community with the aim of preserving resources while meeting their needs for cooking wood and other forest products.

**- Radiative forcing:** Measurement of the influence of a factor (such as GHGs) on the Earth's energy balance. Positive radiative forcing warms the planet.

**- Greenhouse gases (GHG):** Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere, contributing to global warming. It is also a gas present in the atmosphere which absorbs and emits radiation, thus contributing to the greenhouse effect. GHGs are emitted by activities such as burning wood for cooking. The main one is carbon dioxide (CO2).

**- Natural resource management:** Practices and policies aimed at using and preserving natural resources in a sustainable manner.

**- Sea level rise:** Increase in average ocean level due to melting ice and thermal expansion of seawater as it warms.
- **IPCC (IPCC):** Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the main international body responsible for assessing scientific knowledge relating to climate change.

- **Methane (CH₄):** Very potent greenhouse gas, although less abundant than CO₂, which is produced by natural and anthropogenic sources, such as agriculture.

- **Plant resource management:** Sustainable management practices for plants used for various human needs, including cooking, to prevent overexploitation and environmental degradation.

- **Mitigation:** All measures taken to reduce or prevent greenhouse gas emissions in order to limit the impact of climate change.

- **Carbon sinks:** Natural or artificial reservoirs that absorb and store carbon, thereby reducing the concentration of CO₂ in the atmosphere.

- **Permaculture:** Agricultural and social design system that seeks to reproduce the patterns and characteristics of natural ecosystems for sustainable food production.

- **Medicinal plants:** Plant resources used for their therapeutic properties, often managed within a framework of sustainable management of natural resources.

- **Global warming:** Gradual increase in global average temperatures due to the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. It is also a phenomenon of increase in global average temperatures caused mainly by greenhouse gas emissions.

- **Reforestation:** Action of planting trees in an area where the forest has been degraded or destroyed. It is a key strategy for restoring ecosystems and capturing atmospheric carbon.

- **Forest resources:** Products obtained from forests, including wood for cooking, which must be managed sustainably to avoid deforestation and its consequences on the climate.

- **Environmental awareness:** Process aimed at informing and educating individuals on environmental issues, encouraging them to adopt environmentally friendly behaviors.

- **Improved Stoves:** Fireplaces or cookers that increase the energy efficiency of burning wood or other biomass, thereby reducing wood consumption and GHG emissions.

- **Global average temperature:** Average temperature on the Earth's surface. Its increase is a key indicator of climate change.

- **Energy transition:** Transition from an energy system based mainly on fossil fuels to a system based on renewable energies.

- **Vulnerability:** Degree to which a system is likely to be affected by the adverse effects of climate change.
**- Environmental vulnerability:** Degree of sensitivity of an environment or a community to the impacts of climate change and other ecological degradation.

**- Protected areas:** Natural spaces designated for the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems, where the exploitation of plant resources is strictly regulated.

This glossary covers a wide range of terms essential to understanding the interactions between environmental education, management of plant resources for cooking, and climate change.