Biogas_Viable_or_Not_feasibility_study_Tanzania_2007

Biogas: Viable or Not?
An explorative study to the feasibility of introducing biogas
and the impact on HHs’ livelihoods in the Northern regions of
Tanzania
August 2007
University of Utrecht
International Development Studies
Supervisor: Dhr. H. Huisman
Fred Marree 0240257
Marloes Nijboer 0257648

i
Biogas: Viable or Not?
An explorative study to the feasibility of introducing biogas and the
impact on HHs’ livelihoods in the Northern regions of Tanzania
August 2007
University of Utrecht
International Development Studies
Supervisor: Dhr. H. Huisman
Fred Marree 0240257
Marloes Nijboer 0257648

ii
Acknowledgements
________________________________________________________________________________________
It has been a great learning experience to conduct this research in the Northern Tanzania. From the start we
received a lot of support from our supervisor of our Master International Development Studies, Henk
Huisman. The SNV Northern Portfolio staff, especially our supervisor Peter Bos, has been very kind in
welcoming us to Tanzania and supporting our research. Further, we have to thank Christopher Kellner from
SNV Nepal, for his 11 days visit to Tanzania. He assisted us in organizing the first stakeholder meeting and
educated us on the technical aspects of the feasibility study that we wrote for SNV Northern Portfolio. He
also contributed significantly on this research by correcting our work. Thomas Schmitz from GTZ and Ian
Monroe from Winrock International, working on a country-wide feasibility study, visited Tanzania in April.
Working together was very fruitful, so we are thankful for the support we got, the discussions we had and
information exchange that took place. Next, we are very thankful to all the stakeholders that we interviewed
during our stay. We think that they have been very cooperative and that they have participated well in the two
stakeholder meetings we organized. In special we need to express our gratitude to Mr. Sanford Kombe, a
biogas expert who assisted us throughout the whole research. Mr. Evarist N’gwandu and Mr. Harold Ngowi
from CAMARTEC also cooperated the total time that we spend in Tanzania and patiently answered many
questions. Further we have to express our thanks to all the respondents of the user and non-user survey that
we have interviewed during those months. Interviewing them gave us a clear insight in their living situation.
Lastly, we hope that this research will contribute to a better future for biogas technology in Tanzania and
therefore contributes to the strengthening of livelihoods of rural households.
Utrecht,
August 2007

iii
Contents
________________________________________________________________________________________
List of Maps vii
List of Figures vii
List of Tables viii
List of Boxes ix
List of Pictures ix
Abbreviations x
Executive summary xii
Introduction 1
PART I: The Framework 4
Chapter 1: Geographical context 5
§1.1 Physical geography 5
§1.1.1 Deforestation 6
§1.1.2 Land degradation 7
§1.1.3 Water issues and pollution 8
§1.2 Population 9
§1.2.1 Population dynamics 10
§1.2.2 Population indicators 12
§1.2.3 Gender issues 13
§1.3 National economy 13
§1.3.1 Livestock farming 14
§1.4 Energy context 15
§1.4.1 Energy demand 16
§1.4.2 Energy supply 17
§1.5 Governance 18
§1.5.1 Forest management 20
§1.5.2 Energy policies 20
§1.6 Regional context 22
§1.6.1 Kilimanjaro region 22
§1.6.2 Arusha region 24
§1.6.3 Manyara region 25
§1.7 Introduction host organisation: SNV 26
§1.8 Conclusion 27
Chapter 2: Theoretical framework28
§2.1 Thinking about natural resource management 28
§2.1.1 The concept of a resource and resource management 29
§2.1.2 Approaches in resource management 29
§2.1.3 Agricultural land in resource management of developing
countries 31
§2.2 Resource management strategies 32

iv
§2.2.1 Common pool resources 32
§2.2.1.1 Open access/market led resource management 33
§2.2.1.2 Individual ownership 33
§2.2.1.3 Common property/pool resource management 34
§2.2.1.4 Government controlled resource management 34
§2.3 Energy use in developing countries 35
§2.3.1 Short history on biogas 36
§2.3.2 What is biogas? 37
§2.4 Sustainable Livelihoods 38
§2.4.1 Definition of sustainability and livelihood 38
§2.4.2 The Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF) 39
§2.5 Conclusion 42
Chapter 3: Research questions, methodology and conceptual framework 44
§3.1 Conceptual framework 44
§3.2 Research objective and research questions 45
§3.3 Methodology 47
§3.3.1 Secondary data collection 47
§3.3.2 Structured interviews 47
§3.3.3 Semi-structured interviews 47
§3.3.4 In-depth interviews 48
§3.3.5 Surveys 48
§3.3.6 Stakeholder meetings 49
§3.3.7 Observations 49
PART II: Biogas in Northern Tanzania 50
Chapter 4: History of biogas in Northern Tanzania 51
§4.1 History of biogas activities in Northern Tanzania 51
§4.1.1 SIDO 1975-1980 51
§4.1.2 AATP 1980-1983 51
§4.1.3 GTZ, CAMARTEC and their joined BES activities 1983-1992 52
§4.1.4 CAMARTEC 1992-2007 53
§4.1.5 The ELCT 1988-2001 53
§4.1.6 SUDURETA 2001-2007 54
§4.1.7 HEIFER early 1990s 55
§4.1.8 ABC company 1991-2007 55
§4.1.9 Primary Health Care Ambassadors International 1993-2007 55
§4.1.10 Biogas & Solar Company 1994-1999 and 2007 onwards 56
§4.1.11 KAKUTE 1996-2007 56
§4.1.12 FIDE 1996-2007 56
§4.2 Brief results of biogas activities in Northern Tanzania 57
§4.3 Dissemination modalities: two opposite approaches 58
§4.3.1 CAMARTEC approach 58
§4.3.2 ELCT approach 58
§4.4 Changes in popular perception biogas technology 59
§4.5 Changes in demand for biogas and promotional activities 60
§4.6 Conclusion 60

v
Chapter 5: Present status of biogas and lessons learned 62
§5.1 User survey 62
§5.1.1 Socio-economic profile of biogas user 62
§5.2 Non-user survey 65
§5.2.1 Socio-economic profile non-user 65
§5.2.2 Opinion and knowledge about biogas technology of the non-user 68
§5.3 Current situation and performance of the constructed biogas plants 69
§5.3.1 Common status of operation and plant details 69
§5.3.2 Technical problems of the biogas plants 70
§5.4 Performance of the appliances 72
§5.5 Lessons learned from previous biogas activities 74
§5.5.1 Positive lessons 74
§5.5.2 Negative lessons 75
§5.6 Conclusion 77
Chapter 6: Zooming in on the factors that influence biogas in the research area 78
§6.1 Technical factors 78
§6.2 Socio-cultural factors 86
§6.3 Financial/economical factors 91
§6.4 Institutional factors 97
§6.5 Conclusion 99
PART III: Impact of Biogas on HH Level and Future Outlook 100
Chapter 7: Livelihood analysis of impact of biogas on HHs101
§7.1 Sustainable Livelihood Analysis of previous Biogas Extension Programme 101
§7.1.1 Focusing on people 101
§7.1.2 Being Responsive and Participatory 102
§7.1.3 Working at various levels 103
§7.1.4 Working with Partners 103
§7.1.5 Being dynamic 104
§7.1.6 Taking a wide view of sustainability 104
§7.2 Advantages of biogas in theory and practice 105
§7.2.1 Advantages in theory 106
§7.2.2 Advantages in practice 108
§7.2.3 Analysis differences theory and practice on HH level 110
§7.3 Disadvantages of biogas in theory and practice 111
§7.3.1 Disadvantages in theory 111
§7.3.2 Disadvantages in practice 113
§7.3.3 Analysis differences theory and practice on HH level 113
§7.4 Change of time schedule in daily life 114
§7.4.1 Change of time schedule in daily life in theory 114
§7.4.2 Change of time schedule in daily life in practice 114
§7.5 Conclusion 115
Chapter 8: Impact of biogas use on HH livelihoods analyzed by applying the SLF 117
§8.1 Factors influencing decision-making process of livelihood strategy
in relation to the SLF 117
§8.1.1 Vulnerability Context 118

vi
§8.1.2 Transforming Structures and Processes 121
§8.2 Impact of biogas use on livelihood capitals 122
§8.2.1 Natural capital 122
§8.2.2 Financial capital 124
§8.2.3 Physical capital 127
§8.2.4 Social capital 127
§8.2.5 Human capital 129
§8.3 Possibility to use biogas for market purposes 130
§8.4 Livelihood strategies 132
§8.4.1 Biogas as a livelihood strategy 132
§8.4.2 Other livelihood strategies 133
§8.5 Livelihood Outcomes 135
§8.5.1 Livelihood outcomes achieved by biogas as livelihood strategy 135
§8.5.2 Livelihood outcomes achieved by other livelihood strategies 136
Chapter 9: Future outlook of biogas technology in Northern Tanzania 139
§9.1 Financial cost analysis 139
§9.1.1 Other cost saving elements 142
§9.2 Potential scenarios of factors that are important for biogas dissemination 142
§9.2.1 Number of technician trained and constructed biogas plants 142
§9.2.2 Estimation of popular demand 143
§9.3 Required functions and actors coupled 144
§9.4 Opportunities and threats for future dissemination 148
§9.4.1 Opportunities 149
§9.4.2 Threats 151
Part IV: Final Remarks 156
Conclusion 157
Discussion of findings 165
Reflection 166
Limitations 174
Recommendations for future research 176
References 177
Annexes 184

vii
List of Maps
Map 1: Geographical Location of Tanzania 5
Map 2: Forest cover in Tanzania 6
Map 3: Environmental constraints in Tanzania 7
Map 4: Relief map of Tanzania 8
Map 5: Average annual precipitation in Tanzania 9
Map 6: Population density in the year 2000 11
Map 7: Percentage of the population below the basic needs poverty line 12
Map 8: Livestock density in Tanzania 15
Map 9: Location of research area with their districts in Tanzania 22
Map 10: Share of HHs within one km of drinking water (dry season) 79
Map 11: Cattle population per region 81
Map 12: Improved cattle population per region 81
Map 13: Average walking distance to collect fire wood in km 94
List of Figures
Figure 1: Tanzanian population dynamics 10
Figure 2: Population structure of Tanzania in 2002 11
Figure 3: Relative trends in energy in Tanzania 1971-1999 16
Figure 4: Sustainable Livelihood Framework 39
Figure 5: Conceptual framework 44
Figure 6: Number of HH biogas plants constructed per year per coordinator
in research area 57
Figure 7: Spreading pattern of CAMARTEC approach (left) versus
the ELCT approach (right) 58
Figure 8: Age category of the biogas user respondents 63
Figure 9: Main source of income of the biogas users 63
Figure 10: Use of traditional energy sources and kerosene after
purchasing the biogas plant 64
Figure 11: Number of HHs per age category 65
Figure 12: Numbers of animals at non-user HHs 66
Figure 13: Obtaining energy sources by HH member 66
Figure 14: Monthly costs of energy sources 67
Figure 15: Main source of income for non-users 68
Figure 16: Benefits of having a biogas plant by non-users 68
Figure 17: Constraints of having a biogas plant by non-users 69
Figure 18: Number of plants visited per coordinator and construction year 70
Figure 19: Reasons and frequency for dysfunctional plants reported
during biogas user visits 71
Figure 20: Number of problems which occurred with the total amount of appliances 73
Figure 21: Water source of the non-users and sufficiency 80
Figure 22: Amount of manure daily available as plant input at non-users 82
Figure 23: Conditions of the cattle shed at non-users 83
Figure 24: Availability of urine collection at non-users 83
Figure 25: Repair or maintenance services provided to biogas users 85
Figure 26: Topics covered during training after purchasing a biogas plant 85

viii
Figure 27: Type of fertilizer used by non-user 87
Figure 28: Ownership of resources at the non-users 88
Figure 29: Type of appliances wanted by non-users if means where
present to purchase them 90
Figure 30: Main reason of buying plant by users 90
Figure 31: Availability of fuel wood and kerosene for non-users 92
Figure 32: Monthly costs of energy sources 93
Figure 33: Time to obtain energy source by non-users 93
Figure 34: Sustainable Livelihood Framework 117
Figure 35: FIRR depending on the average monthly energy expenses 141
Figure 36: Financial Internal Rate of Return depending on the subsidy level 141
Figure 37: Required functions for sustainable biogas activities 144
List of Tables
Table 1: Economic structure of Tanzania 14
Table 2: Livestock population (in thousands) and growth rates 15
Table 3: Some socio-economic indicators of the three regions 23
Table 4: Numbers and share of cattle in agricultural households in 2003 24
Table 5: Types of organisations interviewed 47
Table 6: Geographical distribution of conducted biogas user and
non-user surveys and in-depth interviews 48
Table 7: Basic data on user survey 62
Table 8: Basic data on non-user survey 65
Table 9: Main sources of water 79
Table 10: Numbers and share of cattle in agricultural HHs in 2003 81
Table 11: Livestock population growth rates 81
Table 12: Contextual technical factors with related score 86
Table 13: Conditional technical factors with related score 86
Table 14: Conditional socio-cultural factors with related score 91
Table 15: HH opinion about electricity availability 91
Table 16: Monthly consumption of energy goods and average costs 92
Table 17: Sources for loans for HHs 94
Table 18: Main reasons to borrow money 96
Table 19: Contextual financial/economic factors with related score 96
Table 20: Conditional financial/economic factor with related score 96
Table 21: Contextual institutional factor with related score 98
Table 22: Conditional institutional factors with related score 98
Table 23: Livelihood outcomes achieved by biogas as livelihood strategy 136
Table 24: Livelihood outcomes achieved by other livelihood strategies 136
Table 25: Basic data for financial cost analysis 140
Table 26: Estimated number of technicians trained and production of biogas plants 143
Table 27: Minimum number of constructed biogas plants on the bases of HHs
with improved dairy cattle 143

ix
List of Boxes
Box 1: Institutional set-up of energy sector 21
Box 2: Joined country initiatives of Tanzania 21
Box 3: Biogas composition 37
Box 4: Uses of biogas 37
Box 5: Development of total costs of a biogas plant 53
Box 6: Biogas lamp and biogas stove 56
Box 7: Bertha Ephata Nnkoh 123
Box 8: Yustina Philemon Mushi 124
Box 9: Tito Abel Pallangyo 125
Box 10: Bertha Epatha Nnkoh 126
Box 11: Mary Lohay 127
Box 12: Yustina Philemon Mushi 128
Box 13: Mariam G. Massawe 128
Box 14: Evelyn Johnson Swai 129
Box 15: Tito Abel Pallangyo 130
Box 16: Mariam G. Massawe 137
Box 17: Overview governmental institutions 145
Box 18: Overview microcredit organisations 146
Box 19: Eastern and Southern Africa Management Institute 147
List of Pictures
Picture 1: An expansion chamber with a few cracks and toilet attachment at the right 70
Picture 2: Gas bubbles out of the lid of the biogas plant showing a gas leakage 71
Picture 3: Biogas plant constructed by FIDE in Babati district 72
Picture 4: Biogas stove with signs of corrosion 73
Picture 5: Biogas lamp in Babati district 74

x
List of Abbreviations
________________________________________________________________________________________
ABI
AATP
ABC
BSC
BES
BORDA
CAMARTEC
CDM
CBFM
GTZ
EAC
ELCT
FIRR
FBD
FIDE
GWh
GVEP
GDP
GNP
HIPC
HH
HBS
HDI
IMF
JFM
LEAT
MW
MFI
MDG
MEM
MNRT
NBS
NCS
NRD
NRM
NEPAD
NGO
PTN
PRSP
PHCA
PSRP
R&D
REA
REF
RWEG
SACCOS
Africa Biogas Initiative
Arusha Appropriate Technology Project
Arusha Biocontractors & Consultancy
Biogas & Solar Company
Biogas Extension Service
Bremen Overseas Research and Development Agency
Centre for Agricultural Mechanisation and Rural Technology
Clean Development Mechanism
Community Based Forest Management
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit
East African Community
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Tanzania
Financial Internal Rate of Return
Forestry and Beekeeping Division
Friends In Development
Gigawatt per hour
Global Village Energy Partnership
Gross Domestic Product
Gross National Product
Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative
Household
Household Baseline Survey
Human Development Index
International Monetary Fund
Joint Forest Management
Lawyers’ Environmental Action Team
Megawatt
Micro Finance Institution
Millennium Development Goals
Ministry of Energy & Minerals
Ministry of Natural Resources & Tourism
National Bureau of Statistics
National Steering Committee
Natural Resource Degradation
Natural Resource Management
New Partnership for African Development
Non-governmental Organization
Portfolio Team North
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
Primary Health Care Ambassadors
Public Service Reform Programme
Research & Development
Rural Energy Agency
Rural Energy Fund
Rural Working Energy Group
Savings And Credit Cooperative Societies

xi
TZS 1,000 = US$ 0.79751
TZS 1,000 = € 0.58445
US$ 1 = € 0.73285
SIDO
SADC
SUDURETA
SEPK
SLA
SLF
SRM
TANESCO
TFA
TPDC
US
WB
WHO
Small Industries Development Organization
Southern African Development Community
Sustainable Development through Renewable Energy in Tanzania
Sustainable Energy Project Karatu
Sustainable Livelihood Approach
Sustainable Livelihood Framework
Sustainable Resource Management
Tanzania Electric Supply Company
Tanzania Farmers Association
Tanzania Petroleum Development Company
United States
World Bank
World Health Organisation

xii
Executive summary
________________________________________________________________________________________
Part I: The Framework
Introduction
• Energy is a vital element in the survival of mankind. Two third of the world population depends
primarily on fossil fuels for its energy supply. It is confirmed that the burning of fossil fuels
contributes to global climate change due to carbon-dioxide emissions. Further, dependence on
biomass resources results in environmental degradation. Both developments contribute to the current
energy crisis, which in its turn affects human society. This has an impact on households (HHs) in
developing countries, especially on their energy supply which gets scarcer and more expensive. This
raises the issue of renewable energy use, like biogas.
Geographical context
• Tanzania is the largest country of East Africa and currently has 37,223,025 inhabitants that are mainly
living in rural areas. Half of the population subsists on less than US$ 0.65 per day, with 40% of
Tanzanians unable to meet their basic daily needs. The average rates of population growth for the
period 1988 to 2002 range from 4.8 percent to 1.4 percent and the average household size is 4.9
persons in 2002. Life expectancy was 46.3 years in 2004.
• Several environmental issues occur in Tanzania, e.g. deforestation, land degradation (soil
degradation, erosion and desertification), water scarcity and pollution. The first two are inherent on
the large scale collection of fire wood for domestic use and making charcoal.
• Tanzania’s stable economy is highly dependent on agricultural activities. An important part is
livestock farming with 99% of the livestock sector in hands of traditional owners. At present the
economy is mainly characterized by growth rates in manufacturing and construction, which increases
the energy demand and consumption. Biomass energy resources, which mainly comprise fire wood
and charcoal from both natural forests and plantations, account for 93% of the total energy
consumption. With rising energy costs, droughts and the dependence of the majority of the population
on fire wood, the energy situation is getting tense for Tanzania.
• The northern regions of Tanzania: the Kilimanjaro, Manyara, and Arusha regions are representing the
average of Tanzania.
• The host organisation, SNV, is a Netherlands based, international development organisation that
advises local organisations to strengthen them and to fight poverty. This year, in collaboration with
many partners they started Biogas for Better Life: An African Initiative. The Initiative aims to install
2 million household-level biogas plants in 10 years.
Theoretical framework
• Natural resource management, renewable energy use and the sustainable livelihood approach are the
main theories underlying this research. Often a plea is made for natural resource management since
the world finds itself in the situation in which most natural resources are in a very bad condition
facing depletion. The cause is in general the open access/market led management of the resources.
Although public-private partnership in the form joint management is occurring more and more.
• The energy sector is also of vital importance since problems such as limited access to energy sources,
the widespread use of traditional biomass and dependence on imported energy sources constitute a
significant obstacle to social and economic development. An alternative is the use of renewable
energy. In this research the renewable energy of focus is biogas.

xiii
• Biogas is a form of renewable energy just as solar, wind, hydrogen and biomass. It is gas that is
produced when organic material of animal or plant origin ferments in an oxygen-free/anaerobe
environment. It is considered by many experts to be an excellent tool for improving the lives of
people in the developing world. It can contribute to a better life in several ways, but the foremost
advantages are related to cooking and lighting.
• The Sustainable Livelihoods Approach is centred on people and their livelihoods. Capabilities, equity
and sustainability are combined in the concept of sustainable livelihoods
• It prioritizes people’s assets (tangible and intangible); their ability to withstand shocks (the
vulnerability context); and policies and institutions that reflect poor people's priorities. A key concept
in the sustainable livelihood approach is the sustainable livelihoods framework.
• The Sustainable Livelihoods Framework presents the main factors that affect people’s livelihoods,
and typical relationships between these like the Vulnerability Context, Transforming structures and
Programmes and Livelihood Strategies and Outcomes.
• The pentagon that is central in the framework represents the inter-related assets of a household and
divides assets in natural, physical, human, financial and social capital.
Methodology
• Households are the unit of analyses of the research. The conceptual framework shows that three
levels of scale: international, national and local levels are influencing the HHs’ livelihoods.
• The main research objective was: “Assessing the feasibility of introducing biogas as renewable
energy in the Northern Zones of Tanzania and gaining insight in the impact of biogas use on the
strengthening of livelihood capacities of HHs on a sustainable basis.”
• The main research questions were:
“To what extent has the renewable energy source biogas contributed and can it contribute to the
strengthening of livelihood capacities of HHs on a sustainable basis?”
“And to what extent are the conditions adequate for the large-scale introduction of
biogas as a renewable energy source in Northern Tanzania?”
• These are divided in five sub-questions:
- Which initiatives and developments have occurred so far concerning biogas in Northern Tanzania?
- What are the main contextual factors related to introduction of biogas in Northern Tanzania?
- What are the main conditional factors related to introduction of biogas in Northern Tanzania?
- What is the impact of the use of biogas on the livelihood of the HH?
- What is the outlook to the future of biogas in Northern Tanzania?
• The following research methods are used: secondary data collection, semi-structured interviews,
surveys, in-depth interviews and stakeholder meetings.
Part II: Biogas in Northern Tanzania
History of biogas in Northern Tanzania
• The main actors in the history of biogas in Northern Tanzania are: SIDO, AATP, GTZ, CAMARTEC,
ELCT, SUDURETA, HEIFER, ABC, PHCA, BSC, KAKUTE and FIDE. Biogas activities started in
the mid 1970s when 120 biogas plants were constructed. Ten years later these plants were not
working anymore. CAMARTEC and GTZ introduced a biogas extension programme (BES) in the

xiv
beginning of the 1980s. They primarily trained masons on the technology and conducted promotions
in villages. Four hundred domestic biogas plants of 16m³ were constructed. Their activities declined
drastically at the end of the 1980s, as the price of building material increased and their subsidy fund
phased out. This commercial approach was not sustainable.
• A second major actor, the ELCT, started biogas activities in 1988. ELCT opted for a different
dissemination strategy than CAMARTEC. They started with local community participation
throughout the whole implementation process. The HHs chosen to get a plant were those which could
provide sufficient physical capital themselves.
• ELCT tried to spread the technology from different places in the country, while CAMARTEC spread
the technology only from Northern Tanzania. In 2001, the ELCT stopped with its biogas activities.
The CAMARTEC approach was relatively more successful.
• New actors in the field of biogas emerged in the first half of the 1990s, but biogas activities remained
little. In the second half of the 1990s, the organisation FIDE became an important actor. They
constructed seventy plants from 1996 onwards.
• In total approximately 885 biogas plants of the 16m³ fixed dome design have been constructed until
now.
• In the coffee-banana belt in Northern Tanzania the perception towards biogas technology has always
been very positive. On the contrary, in the relatively dryer areas, the people were more sceptic as they
were involved in different traditional agricultural practices. A difference in perception existed
between men and women: women are the ones having more direct benefits of a biogas plant so they
were more open to it than men.
• It is estimated that the major part of the population knows about biogas and knows its principles. This
has led to an increase in demand, which was also caused by rising energy prices and unreliability of
electricity.
Present status of biogas and lessons learned
• A user survey was designed for biogas users to gain insight in their HH situation: its socio-economic
profile and their experiences with the use of biogas. This was done in order to define positive and
negative lessons learned. Users were found through organisations and by asking in villages. The 35
surveys were conducted in all three regions.
• The users are relatively wealthy compared to the average Tanzanian family. They often posses a
vehicle or bicycle, a relatively big house, on average four improved dairy cattle and other livestock
(especially pigs). In 68% of the case they are involved in small-scale farming. 65% of the interviewed
HHs state that they grow vegetables and fruits at their compound and 90% uses the production for
both own consumption and sale at the market. 29% of biogas users had a toilet attached to their
biogas plant.
• A non-user survey was designed to gain insight in the (socio-economic) situation of a HH that lives in
the same physical environment as a biogas user. The non-users that were interviewed were all
neighbours of the users The outcomes can be used to identify if the conditions that are required for
future biogas activities can be met. Further, the perception regarding the technology is defined.
Twenty surveys were conducted in the Arusha and Manyara regions.
• The non-users are relatively poorer than the users. This is concluded by observing physical assets at
houses, the sizes of the vegetable garden and amount of energy used compared to the family size. The
average number of cattle among non-users is 3.5, which in 65% of the cases are kept at zero-grazing
conditions 24 hours a day. Except for one, all HHs use fire wood as their main source of energy. This
wood is often collected by the female HH members. 58% obtains that energy source for free. 85%
does not spend money on fertilizers, but they all use the manure of the livestock they have. 60% of
the non-users are involved in small-scale farming as main source of income. 100% confirmed that

xv
they heard of the technology and 75% of them answered that they were aware of biogas principles.
Seven different benefits of having a biogas plant were identified by non-users and the high investment
cost was mentioned most as a disadvantage. The socio-economic profile of the non-users shows that
they could be integrated in the framework of biogas use.
• The common status and technical performance of biogas plants and appliances was assessed. 34% of
the biogas users had a major problem with their plant. The average functioning years until a plant
broke down are 14.5 years. Main problems that were reported were blockages, gas leakages en broken
gas pipe systems. 33% of the plants that broke down were repaired. At the moment, 20% of all visited
plants are not working. All problems occurred at plants constructed during the 1980s and the first half
of 1990s, thus age is a major cause.
• The 35 users reported that 42 biogas stoves and 38 biogas lamps were present. Half of all household
encountered problems with the appliances and 25% of their problems were fixed. The success rate of
the repairs was one hundred percent. 88% of the problems occurred at users who bought their plant
during the 1980s and the first half of 1990s, which again shows that age plays a major role. Main
problems with stoves were broken rings, probably caused by corrosion. Main problems with lamps
were low gas pressures and blockages.
• There are several positive and negative lessons learned from past biogas activities until now. Positive
lessons are: the positive perception of stakeholders, users and non-users towards biogas and high
demand of the technology; good performance of the original CAMARTEC design; the development
of creation and spreading of knowledge under technicians; the existing expertise in the research area;
non-users fit in the framework of biogas use. Negative lessons learned are: the lack of qualitative
promotion of the technology; the lack of sustainability in approach; the lack of ability to reach the
target group; the limited stakeholder interaction and communication; the lack of
awareness/informational constraint non-users; the technical informational constraint users; the high
investment costs and no proper follow up/training provided.
Zooming in on research area
• For the research area to be feasible for introduction of biogas, evaluation of requirements is needed.
The requirements that are assessed for the area are divided in technical, socio-cultural,
financial/economical and institutional requirements. A division is made between contextual and
conditional factors. These factors were given a score according to their current status. These scores
show an overview of the feasibility of introduction of the technology.
• Contextual technical factors with a very good to extremely good status are: daily temperatures over
20°C throughout the year; hilly terrain; availability of water; sufficient space for locating the plant;
livestock/agricultural waste availability and condition.
• Conditional technical factors with a very good status are: proper plant design; availability proper
construction material. Factors which have a poor status are: appliances (quality and mass production);
proper delivery follow up/ after sell service; repair and or maintenance services; capability HH to
cope with minor problem solving and maintenance.
• Conditional socio-cultural factors with a good to extremely good status are: awareness of impact of
biogas technology; substitution of fuel wood by biogas (cooking habit, climate etc wise); potential
users are familiar with handling organic fertilizers; biogas plant can be integrated in lifestyle of
potential user. Factors with not a good, but not a poor status are: negative perception of the use of bio-
fuels; acceptance of potential users in attaching a toilet to a biogas plant. A factor with a poor status
is: role of women in decision-making in the HH.
• Contextual financial/economic factors with a good to extremely good status are: scarcity of
(traditional) energy sources; high price of traditional energy sources; far walking distance and long

xvi
time spent on collecting fire wood on a daily basis. A factor which has a poor status is: access to
loans/credit/subsidy.
• A conditional financial/economic factor with a very good status is: high health costs. Factors with a
very poor status are: ability to make initial investment for potential users; saving behaviour.
• A contextual institutional factor with a good status is: the link with present government activities.
• Conditional institutional factors with a very good to extremely good status are: positive attitude of the
national government towards supporting biogas; positive attitude of main stakeholders towards
involvement in biogas. A factor with not a good, but not a poor status is: reaching of the target group
through relevant organisations/institutions. A factor with a poor status is: interaction/ communication
between main stakeholders.
Part III: Impact of biogas on HH level and Future Outlook
Biogas: theory and practice compared
• The BES programme of the 1980s is evaluated by using six criteria of the Sustainable Livelihood
Approach (SLA). Focusing on people was achieved in a practical manner: specific adapted
construction for HHs and training in plant operation. Due to the commercial approach the target
group was limited to HH that could afford a plant. The programme tried to be responsive and
participatory through village meetings and commercialisation. For HHs participation has its limits
when long term vision is required since they lack judgement capacity on technical aspects. Further,
users or potential users did not come forward to demand the technology. Next, BES did not work on
various levels, since macro level involvement was not achieved. Also projects in different countries
were not well communicated, besides the establishment of a biogas forum. Working with partners
was not a success, since there were no partnerships established with other stakeholders in the public
and the private sector. The programme decided between being dynamic and delivering a standardized
biogas plant design. Standardization was chosen. However, with limited activity the BES did plan and
supervise capacity for individually designed units which differ either in size or proposed utilization of
gas or slurry. Sustainability was on most points not achieved. Economically the programme was not
sustainable, but on household level it was. Due to the fact that the topic is interdisciplinary,
institutional sustainability was not achieved. Also, after construction of the plant institutions did not
say involved. Socially it was not sustainable either, because this was supposed to be achieved through
commercial acceptation of the product by the population, which did not happen. It is doubtful if it was
environmental sustainable. On HH level it was, but on regional and national level it is uncertain, since
parts of plants were flown into the country, and transported over large distances. In general the SLA
evaluation has a negative outcome for the BES programme.
• Advantages and disadvantages of biogas compared in theory and practice show that some advantages
in theory are not experienced in the field. For disadvantages it is the other way around: disadvantages
in practice are not always mentioned in theory.
• Many of the theoretical advantages were experienced in practice. The main advantages experienced
can be characterized as energy, income and health related benefits. They mostly value the reduction in
energy expenses, the bio-slurry and the improvement of health of the household. Further women
notice a significant reduction in workload.
• The main disadvantages in practice can be typified as financial and technical related benefits. The
initial investment cost is considered too high and they lack water for daily need. Further, low gas
pressure in colder seasons is a disadvantage. Lastly mentioned is lack of knowledge of how to
maintain the plant and how to do minor problem solving.

xvii
• Looking at the advantage time, theory matches the reality. The most time was saved in collecting
energy sources, cooking time and other daily activities. Collecting energy sources contributed the
most with saving of 3.5 hours per day.
Impact of biogas use on HHs livelihoods analyzed by applying the SLF
• The decision-making processes for determining the HHs livelihood are firstly influenced by the
vulnerability context that frames the external environment in which people exist. In general, people’s
livelihoods and the wider availability of capitals are influenced by three factors: critical trends, shocks
and seasonality. Shocks can destroy assets directly and force people to abandon their homes. In this
context they face natural-, livestock-, crop- and health shocks. Natural shocks regarding the start and
intensity of the rainy season, livestock shocks concerning livestock diseases like Rift Valley Fever,
crop shocks in relation to crop diseases and health shocks because of prevalence of malaria,
HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis. Trends may (or may not) be more subtle, though they are more
predictable. The population in the research area experiences population-, resource trends and the
international/national trend of rising energy prices. Seasonal shifts in prices, employment
opportunities and food availability are one of the greatest and most enduring sources of difficulties for
poor people. Through 2 wet and dry seasons the food availability changes. Further temperature
changes influence the amount of gas available. Secondly, transforming structures and processes are
institutions, organizations, policies and legislation that shape livelihoods. The structures and
processes that were valid in the past and are valid at present are the BES programme of the 1980s, the
Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers, public service delivery, many organizations present in the area
and for the future the programme ‘Biogas for Better Life: An African Initiative’.
• A livelihood is built on several interrelated capitals: natural, financial, physical, social and human, as
described in chapter two on the theoretical framework. People try to construct a certain combination
of these capitals in order to achieve positive livelihood outcomes. Land is the most important natural
capital of HHs, because most families grow crops and sell the surplus on the market. Financial capital
is made up by stocks and regular money inflow. It is directly used by HHs to achieve their livelihood
objectives, for example when buying food. Further, financial capital is the capital that is mostly used
to strengthen other types of capital. Most HHs do not have much financial capital, but enough to
sustain a living. What they have they invest in primary needs. Biogas use increases financial capital in
reducing energy and health expenses. Physical capital includes the material goods and basic
infrastructure that a HH has access to. Examples range from basic shelter to transport means and from
energy supply to livestock, which are all very important for HH in the research area. Through saving
of money users can choose to by new products, more cattle and/or land or invest in improvement of
infrastructure Social capital entails the resources of HHs that are developed through interactions,
memberships and relations of trust. Social relations are relatively strong in the research area, as many
people sustain a large network of family and friends. Additionally, there exist relatively a lot
opportunities to join groups or organizations. Human capital represents the skills, knowledge, ability
to labour and good health. In the research area availability and quality of labour is important and the
level of agricultural skills. human capital can be acquired trough on site training on biogas
technology. Additionally, money saved makes it possible to send members of the HH for proper
schooling. In relation to health, the smoke reduction and hygiene improvement often improves the
wellbeing of the HH.
• The possibility to use biogas for market purposes resulted in diverse activities: cheese making,
yoghurt making, beer brewing, chapatti baking, coffee roasting and electricity generation. All
respondents who employed one of these activities stated that this had much more impact on their
livelihood than using biogas for cooking and lighting. These HHs experience, on top of their usual

xviii
income saving benefits, real income from their newly employed activities. Often reinvestment of the
financial capital in the other 4 capitals took place.
• Livelihood strategies, influenced by livelihood assets, transforming structures and processes and the
vulnerability context, help to understand people’s priorities: why they do what they do. Next to biogas
HH employ a variety of activities that are resource and non-resource based. Examples are fire wood
selling, crop selling, dairy production and livestock trade. It can be concluded that having a biogas
plant is not the major livelihood strategy that people prioritize. Therefore, the position of biogas in
people’s livelihood strategies has currently a minor role.
• The livelihood outcome is the final aspect of the SLF. Livelihood outcomes are categorized in: more
income, increased well-being, reduced vulnerability, improved food security and more sustainable use
of the natural resource base. Certain achieved livelihood outcomes can lead to reinvestment in one or
more livelihood capitals. The livelihood outcomes among interviewed HHs, whether biogas or other
activities form their main livelihood strategy, are mainly related to an increase in income and
achieving increased well-being.
Future outlook of biogas in Northern Tanzania
• From a financial point of view, it is interesting for HHs to invest in a biogas plant as the return rates
would be relatively high for a HH that spends the average amount of money for energy.
The potential number of technicians trained, number of biogas plants constructed and popular demand
in terms of HHs with improved dairy cattle can be seen as very positive signs for large-scale biogas
plant distribution. In ten years 769 technicians can build 12,814 plants. The potential target group,
calculated by HH that own improved cattle, is 209,405, which account potentially for 35,421 plants.
• The present actors related to biogas in the research are together able to take up almost all different
functions required for a future biogas programme. Marketing and extension on bio-slurry use are
highly suitable functions for actors, which could contribute to the awareness level of biogas
principles. Top-down roles can not immediately be taken up by present actors.
• There are various opportunities defined for a future programme. The main focus must be on the
supply side and less on the demand side. There is a high level of interest from the present actors and
there are several options for linking with existing and upcoming strategies.
• The main threats defined are competitions with the private sector product and company wise, low
know how of local technicians, availability and transparency of funds and institutional set up with the
restructuring of CAMARTEC as important actor.
• Overall, the opportunities overshadow the threats, showing that at present there is a favourable
situation for setting-up and implementing a domestic biogas programme.
Part IV Final Remarks
Conclusion
• Which initiatives and developments have occurred so far concerning biogas in Northern Tanzania?
The history of biogas in Tanzania dates back more than thirty years. Tanzania and Germany
introduced a biogas programme (BES) in 1980s for HHs, which was conducted by CAMARTEC. Due
to rising costs of building material and fading out of subsidies the BES came to an end around 1990.
CAMARTEC continued a commercial approach. Another second major actor, the ELCT, tried to
involve the local community by letting them cooperate in construction. In the beginning of the 1990s
private entrepreneurs emerged, which were often former employees of CAMARTEC. FIDE is
currently involved in biogas projects that are subsidized by their donor. But the peak of biogas was
during the BES in the 1980s. A total of 885 biogas plants of the 16m³ fixed dome design were
constructed. The popular perception differed per region and social groups. People who practiced

xix
traditional agricultural activities, people who were higher educated and women were all very positive.
Promotional efforts increased the demand for biogas. The interviewed biogas users are relatively
wealthy, they own on average four improved dairy cattle and are mainly involved in small-scale
farming. The interviewed non-users are relatively poorer than their neighbour who uses biogas. On
average they own three to four cattle, but often no transportation means were present. All of them use
fire wood as main source of energy, which is collected by the female HH members. The status of the
plants build recently were all very positive, especially those of FIDE. 34% (twelve plants) of the users
stated that they faced a major problem with the plant. 20% (seven plants) of the were not working
anymore. 32% of the biogas stoves and 24% of biogas lamps had a problem. 25% was repaired, which
had a success rate of one hundred percent. Important positive lessons learned are: the positive
perception of different stakeholders and relatively high demand; a good plant design; existing
expertise; non-users fit the framework for future biogas use. Important negative lessons learned are:
the lack of qualitative promotion; the lack of sustainability of the approach; the limited stakeholder
interaction and communication; the lack of awareness non-users; the high investment costs; the lack
of proper follow-up service and training.
• What are the main contextual factors related to introduction of biogas in Northern Tanzania?
Except the water availability, the climatic provides a positive context for biogas. Average
temperatures vary between 20°C to 27°C during the year. At higher mountain slopes it stays cooler.
Annual rainfall is unreliable since the two wet seasons vary in intensity and the starting period.
Farming systems in the region are characterized by relatively small plots, with livestock kept zero-
grazing. HHs own three to four cows and have a vegetable garden. This provides sufficient manure
and agricultural waste as plant input. Also, enough space is present at the HHs for hosting a plant.
Fire wood is the most used traditional energy source. Despite the deforestation rate, growing
population and longer distances that people have to walk to collect it, this energy source is still widely
available. Prices of other energy sources are steadily rising, which puts pressure on the use of fire
wood. This is a positive development for the feasibility of biogas activities. The position of the
government towards biogas is very positive. The ‘Biogas for Better Life: An African Initiative’ is in
line with their national initiatives. A main role for them could be promotion. Other actors are also in
general very positive, but sceptic about the sustainability of activities as many of them experienced
the decline in activities from 1990s onward. Financial institutions also expressed enthusiasm, but saw
a problem in financial sustainability. HHs that practice small-scale farming hardly have access to
loans or credit as requirements are very strict. SACCOS can be a solution to this problem. In general,
the access to institutions is very difficult for rural HHs. Mainly because they lack information about
how to access them.
• What are the main conditional factors related to introduction of biogas in Northern Tanzania?
There are many other factors than contextual factors that influence the feasibility of biogas activities.
Technical factors include a good quality plant design and appliances and material. These are all
present in the region. In the past a proper delivery of follow up or after sell services was not
established, except for FIDE. HHs were dependent on the knowledge of local technicians. Overall,
technical factors show that the technique in itself is performing good, only the services after
construction and involvement of the buyer need special attention. Several socio-cultural factors
influence biogas. A positive aspect is that around 85% of the population in the area is used to handle
animal manure and agricultural waste. A plant can be integrated in the life style, because respondents
confirmed the benefits of time saving. The awareness and knowledge of biogas are very low at
present. Also, the role of women within the household determines the degree of success and the

xx
demand in the future as they are the main beneficiaries. This is factor is important as the male head of
the household makes often the decisions. Partly, a negative perception exists on bio-fuels. One third
of the HHs mentioned problems with smoke in the kitchen. All interviewed potential users were
interested in attachment of a toilet to a plant. Awareness of the consequences for the environment by
using fuel wood also helps the demand for biogas. HHs are prioritizing are things than reduce
environmental consequences. Conditional financial/economical factors are also very important. The
initial investment costs for (rural) potential users is too high and this a one of the major constraints.
People are not able or used to save or invest. Only 3.8% of the rural HHs owns a saving or bank
account. Also, 55% mentioned that they have problems in paying their health costs. Institutional
factors like interaction and communication between main institutions and organisations and reaching
of the target group through institutions are important. This hardly happened in the past, but since
March 2007 there have been regular meetings which show improvement. Two thirds of all conditional
factors are largely met. Technical (physical) and socio-cultural factors make up the largest of this
share. The biggest challenges are to make the financial/economical factors more positive.
• What is the impact of the use of biogas on the livelihood of the HH?
Biogas plants provide biogas (mainly for cooking and lighting) and bio-slurry for fertilizing crops.
Possible advantages can be divided in energy, health, environmental, economical, gender
convenience/time related benefits. In the research area, users save money on energy and health
expenditures. The bio-slurry assists them in producing healthier crops. Biogas use significantly
changes the workload of women as no fuel wood has to be collected. They save on average three to
four hours on this activity. Environmental advantages of biogas use were not analyzed, but it becomes
clear that less dependence on forests exist which contributes to less the greenhouse gasses.
Disadvantages of biogas use were also mentioned. Many respondents argue that the total cost of a
biogas plant is too high. Further, time is needed to collect water for the plant and search for grasses
and fodder to feed their livestock. Before using biogas, not all respondents had there cattle zero-
grazing. Also, gas varies per season as less is available in the colder seasons. The smell of the gas
before it is lit is sometimes mentioned as disadvantage. Also, lack of knowledge of how to maintain
the plant and how to do minor problem solving is a disadvantage. The decision-making processes for
determining the livelihood strategies of the HHs’ livelihoods are firstly influenced by the vulnerability
context. In this context they face natural-, livestock-, crop- and health shocks. Shifts in temperature
and rainy season and trends in energy prices are important to mention. Also, transforming structures
and processes influence livelihood strategies and livelihoods. In the past the BES programme of the
1980s and recently efforts of the PRSP and public service delivery are influencing HH livelihood
strategies. A livelihood is built on several interrelated capitals (natural, financial, physical, social and
human), that all get influenced when biogas is used. Natural capital increases mostly due to applying
the fertile bio-slurry to their vegetable garden. Financial capital increases through biogas because of a
reduction of energy- and health expenses. When biogas is exploited for marketing purposes (e.g.
cheese making), HHs even earn an income on top of their usual income saving benefits. Physical
capital can increase through biogas use, although it is optional. By saving money users can choose to
by new products, more cattle and/or land or invest in improvement of infrastructure. Often, social
capital increases because a biogas plant attracts curious people. Human capital can be acquired trough
on site training on biogas technology as well as using the saved money for education purposes. The
situation of the HHs, influenced by livelihood assets, transforming structures and processes and the
vulnerability context, determine the livelihood strategies that HH choose. There can be identified a
variety of activities, which form other livelihood strategies. These are mainly natural resource based,
like fire wood selling, crop selling, dairy production. It can be concluded that having a biogas plant is
not the major livelihood strategy people prioritize. The position of biogas in people’s livelihood

xxi
strategies has currently a minor role. The livelihood outcomes among interviewed HHs mainly relate
to an increase in income and achieving increased well-being.
• What is the outlook to the future of biogas in Northern Tanzania?
As it seems feasible to introduce biogas in the research area, it is interesting to analyze possible
scenarios of factors that are important for biogas dissemination based on current capacity. The
number of technicians trained, number of biogas plants constructed and popular demand in terms of
HHs with improved dairy cattle are analyzed. The estimated number of technicians trained in one year
is twenty. The growth rate is approximately 1.5, meaning after ten years 769 technicians could be
present. They can construct approximately 12,814 plants in this period. There are 209,405 HHs that
own improved dairy cattle and held under zero-grazing conditions. This potential target group could
account for 35,421 plants based on recent experiences elsewhere in Tanzania. All these scenarios are
very positive for future dissemination of the technology. For a future biogas program functions need
to be couple to present actors in the research area. At present this outcome is also positive, because
actors together are able to take up almost all different functions required. Contribution to the
awareness level of biogas principles through promotional activities and training, in the functions of
marketing of biogas and extension on bio-slurry use, are highly suitable functions for actors. Top-
down roles can not immediately be taken up by present actors. There are various opportunities
defined for a future program. The main focus must be on the supply side and less on the demand side.
There is a high level of interest from the present actors and there are several options for linking with
existing and upcoming strategies. The main threats defined are competitions with the private sector
product and company wise, little know-how of local technicians, availability and transparency of
funds. Overall, the opportunities overshadow the threats and biogas potentially has a future in
Northern Tanzania.

1
Introduction
________________________________________________________________________________________
“Most people spend more time and energy going around problems than in trying
to solve them.” - by Henry Ford1
Energy is a vital element in the survival of mankind. Approximately two third of the world’s population
depends primarily on fossil fuels for its energy supply, whereas one third obtains its energy supply from
traditional biomass resources. The latter group represents for a large part the population of developing
countries, which are characterised by having a relatively low availability of energy services.
In recent years, it is confirmed that burning of fossil fuels, which is a result of human action, contributes
tremendously to changes in the Earth’s climate. This is especially related to high carbon dioxide emission
levels that contribute to rising temperatures on the planet. Additionally, dependence on and extensive use of
biomass resources can lead to environmental degradation. This also contributes to climate change. As climate
change in itself is a cause of environmental degradation, these changes can have devastating effects on human
societies.
The scarcity of fossil fuels and the large amount of by climate change affected natural environments all over
the world lead to identification of a global energy crisis that hit national economies. The record of high oil
prices reflects this crisis. Additionally, relatively high growth rates of the world’s population contribute
enormously to pressure on natural resources as the demand for energy increases. For developing countries, the
impact of an increase of energy costs in real terms can be relatively low at the international level, but
immense on the local level.
The international price developments of energy, scarcity of non-renewable energy sources and environmental
degradation all have an impact on households (HHs) in developing countries. Many HHs experience problems
with their energy supply. They are facing a decline in availability of traditional cooking fuels and often
commercial fuels are too expensive and their availability is unreliable. Women and children spend hours
collecting wood, animal manure or crop residues. These problems raise the issue of renewable energy use.
Different renewable energy techniques, like solar power, wind power, hydro power, geothermal energy, and
biogas energy cannot be exhausted like fossil fuels and contribute far less to emission of greenhouse gasses.
There are many large scale renewable energy projects around the world, but these technologies are also suited
for small scale appliance which is often used in rural and remote areas, where energy is often crucial for
human well being.
This research focuses on the impact of biogas as a renewable energy on rural HHs. Biogas use can have a
major impact on HHs’ livelihoods and it is in potential a major contributor to alleviate poverty. On the HH
1
Source: Thinkexist.com, 2006

2
level, biogas can for example contribute in reducing the daily workload of women and children and improving
the health situation of HH members. On the national level, biogas can facilitate less dependency on
international energy markets and therefore stimulate economic development. These benefits of biogas use,
among others, can result in poverty reduction. Poverty reduction focusing on HH level, is currently at the
centre of the international development debate.
The country where the research is conducted is Tanzania, and more specifically the Northern zones. For the
population of Tanzania, farming practices are characteristic as the main way of living, especially in rural
areas. In large parts of Tanzania, agricultural HHs are characterized by possessing livestock. The national
context of high dependency on fire wood and charcoal use, which both contribute to environmental
degradation and high energy prices, makes Tanzania a country to explore the feasibility of introduction of
biogas technology and the impact it can have on HHs’ livelihoods. This is especially interesting since over
two decades ago, in the 1980s, a biogas programme was set-up and implemented, but quickly faded away.
Before the take off of this program, a feasibility study was never conducted. Also there has never been an
evaluation afterwards, so its degree of success and impact are for a large part unknown. However, the
outcome and impacts of this programme were of major influence to this research. This thesis will argue for a
positive impact of biogas technology on HH level. However there are some obstacles to overcome before
introducing the technology and providing it to HHs in a sustainable way in the future.
The following central questions are formulated:
“To what extent has the renewable energy source biogas contributed and can it
contribute to the strengthening of livelihood capacities of HHs on a sustainable
basis?”
and
“To what extent are the conditions adequate for the large-scale introduction of biogas
as a renewable energy source in Northern Tanzania?”
The theories underlying the renewable energy issue from international/national to local level are: natural
resource management, renewable energy use and sustainable livelihoods. The previous theory contains the
Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF) that is used as guideline for analysis of HHs’ livelihoods, which
makes the HH the unit of analysis. This unit of analysis is chosen because the whole HH experiences the
impact of biogas technology.
The methodology used for the research was mainly qualitative research supported by quantitative research,
since a livelihood analysis requires in-depth research to the HH. The following methods were used: secondary
data collection, semi-structured interviews, surveys, in-depth interviews and stakeholder meetings.

3
The Dutch Development Organisation/ Stichting Nederlandse Vrijwilligers (SNV) was host organisation for
the research. They are worldwide involved in domestic biogas programs and are currently participating in the
‘Biogas for Better Life: An African Initiative’ (annex 1). An introduction to this ‘capacity building’
organisation will be given in the first chapter (section 1.7).
The thesis is divided in three main parts. Part I includes the first three chapters, respectively describing the
geographical context, theoretical framework and methodology. In this part the context of the research is
drawn. The second part is describing biogas in Northern Tanzania in general and contains three chapters.
Chapter 4 presents an overview of the history of biogas activities in Northern Tanzania, in which the main
actors and activities of the biogas programme in the 1980s are analyzed. Chapter 5 continues with describing
the present status of biogas in Northern Tanzania. Here the socio-economic profile of biogas users and non-
users in addition to the present status of biogas plants and its appliances are analyzed. The sixth chapter
zooms in on the research area and focuses on different factors (technical, socio-cultural, financial/economical
and institutional), which influence biogas use and the potential of the technology. The impact on HH level
and future impact of biogas in the research area form respectively the subjects of chapter 7 and 8 in part III.
First, an impression is given on the direct impact on HHs’ livelihoods and the advantages and disadvantages
of biogas use. Chapter 7 also contains descriptions of livelihood regarding different aspect of the SLF.
Chapter 8 provides a practical view to the future possibilities regarding the introduction of the technology in
the research area. Lastly, the thesis finishes with a reflection and conclusion on the research. This final
chapter reflects the findings of this thesis and tries to position biogas in the wider context of the permanent
issue of renewable energy in the world today. Lastly an attempt is made to provide an answer to the central
research questions.

4
PART I
The Framework
Geography
Theory
Methodology
The first part functions as an introduction of the research’s setting and encompasses the
geographical context, theoretical framework and methodology. The geographical context starts
with an overview of the relevant geographical issues in Tanzania, before focusing on the
research area. The theoretical framework discusses important theories related to this research.
These are in particular natural resource management and the sustainable livelihood approach.
The third chapter continues about how this research academically is set-up. The research
questions, the methods used and encountered limitations are the focus of attention.

5
Chapter 1: Geographical context
________________________________________________________________________________________
Before starting the research analysis in part II, this chapter sketches the context of the country where the
research took place. It provides insight in a range of relevant national and regional factors with regard to the
physical, economical, political and social environment. Topics discussed are: physical geography, population,
economy, energy, governance and an introduction of the research area. Additionally, an introduction to the
host organisation SNV is offered.
§1.1 Physical geography
Tanzania is the largest country of East Africa and consists of the mainland plus the major islands of Zanzibar,
Pemba and Mafia. Starting clockwise from the South, the countries bordering Tanzania are Mozambique,
Malawi, Zambia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda and Kenya. The Eastern part of
the country borders the Indian Ocean (map 1).
Map 1: Geographical location of Tanzania
Source: Nations Online
[online], 2005
Source: Sweetmarias [online], 2005
In 1996, the capital Dar es Salaam on the East coast shifted to Dodoma that is situated in the geographical
centre of the country. Other major towns are Mwanza, Zanzibar Town, Morogoro, Mbeya and Tanga.
Tanzania’s landscape comprises three physiographic regions, namely: the islands and the coastal plains to the

6
East with the inland plateau and the highlands. Further, it contains part of the Great Rift Valley that runs from
the Northeast of Africa through central Tanzania, which results in several great lakes. In the North, the
country borders Lake Victoria and in the West Lake Tanganyika. Tanzania covers several national parks and
reserves, which contain large concentrations of wild animals. The country is also home to the highest
mountain of Africa: the snow-capped Mount Kilimanjaro (The United Republic of Tanzania, [year
unknown]). Several environmental issues occur in Tanzania, e.g. deforestation, land degradation, water
scarcity and pollution. These issues are the focus of the following subsections.
§1.1.1 Deforestation
The forests in Tanzania cover 39.9% of the total land area (map 2), which is equivalent to 35,257,000
hectares. Between 1990 and 2000, Tanzania lost annually on average 412,300 hectares of forest, which
amounted into an annual deforestation rate of almost 1%. This rate increased between 2000 and 2005 to
1.1% (Butler, 2006). In comparison to East Africa, the annual deforestation rate between 1990 and 2000
is 1% (FAO, 2000). Of the twenty administrative regions in the country, six are ranked as having severe
fuel wood scarcity (among them the Kilimanjaro region) and six other regions with moderate fuel wood
scarcity (Kaale, 2005).
Map 2: Forest cover in Tanzania
Source: FAO [online], 2006
It is uncertain what the major causes are for deforestation in Tanzania. According to ProBEC [year
unknown], these reasons are mainly related to inefficient charcoal and fire wood production for domestic
purposes and land clearances to expand agricultural activities. This has also been addressed by Brylinsky
(1997), who see high population growth and lack of alternative energy sources as major underlying
factors. Kaale (2005, pp. 21) on the other hand, emphasized that the impact of fire wood production by
HHs has little impact on the deforestation rate in Tanzania. The reasons for this are that women and
children, who are the main collectors of fire wood, do not own and use appropriate tools for cutting whole
Water
Closed forest
Open/fragmented forest
Other wooded lands
Other land cover
Land cover

7
trees and that most of the fire wood is collected by means of own farm land trees. Dejene et al. (1997)
also mention that deforestation in Tanzania is primarily caused by cultivating new areas rather than fire
wood collecting. Other factors that contribute to the deforestation rate are timber activities, overgrazing
and uncontrolled bush fires.
§1.1.2 Land degradation
The issue of deforestation is linked with land degradation as the diminishment of trees can cause
problems related to soil degradation, erosion and desertification. Map 3 provides an overview of
important environmental constraints with regard to land degradation issues in Tanzania.
Map 3: Environmental constraints in Tanzania
One of the main concerns of land degradation in developing countries is soil degradation, which can be
divided into soil erosion and soil fertility. Tanzania is becoming more vulnerable to these kinds of
degradation since the first half of the 20th
century. Studies have shown that deforestation, agricultural
practices and overgrazing are the main reasons for soil degradation in the country. Cultivating areas by
cutting trees has caused a destruction of vegetation cover and soil organic matter. In combination with
periods of heavy rainfall, these developments contributed to the increasing erosion rates in the country
(Dejene et al., 1997). Tanzania has relatively fertile areas on mountain slopes, which have the highest
potential risk to erode faster than other areas (map 4). There exist little data on the impact of erosion,
although an estimation was made, stating that erosion causes the Gross National Product (GNP) of
Tanzania to decrease with 0.5 to 1.5% each year (Schmitz, 2007).
Low soil suitability
Erratic rainfall and cold stress risks
Steep slopes and mountains
Severe and very severe land degradation
Low to medium climatic production potential
High climatic production potential
Type of constraint

8
750-1000
1000-1500
1500-2000
2000-3000
3000-4000
4000-5000
>5000
Map 4: Relief map of Tanzania
Another issue related to soil degradation is overgrazing, which in turn is related to desertification. The
main problems with desertification are on the one hand the quick occurrence of the problem and on the
other hand the long period to resolve the problem. It is estimated that at the end of the 1990s 60% of the
total land area, but especially in the relatively drier parts, showed indications of desertification (Nyange,
1999). While government officials in Tanzania see large herds of livestock as a major contributor to
desertification, the majority of the Tanzanian population is trying hard to maximize livestock numbers for
social, cultural and economic reasons. An example of an effort that has been taken to minimize
overgrazing is temporarily moving livestock into other areas. This led to transference of the problem
instead of minimizing it (Dejene et al., 1997).
§1.1.3 Water issues and pollution
Although effects of land degradation are largely related to soil degradation, it has also a significant impact
on water related issues, like drought and water quality. The increasing average temperatures on earth in
combination with deforestation in Tanzania contribute to longer periods of drought in the country.
Drought in Tanzania has caused for example major food shortages for the larger part of the rural
population as this group is mainly dependent on rain-fed agriculture. The drought crisis is affecting
approximately 85% of Tanzania’s 129 districts, which comes to an acute food shortage for 3.7 million
people. Crop failures are recently increasing, due to poor rainfall, notably in the agro-pastoral areas
(Drought Information Bulletin, 2006). These are areas where people conduct agricultural activities and
roam large herds of livestock.
Precipitation rates are the highest around Lake Victoria and in the South-eastern part of the country. The
mountainous areas in the North, where for example Mount Kilimanjaro is located, also receive a
Altitude category in meters
0-100
100-200
200-300
300-400
400-500
500-750

9
substantial amount of rainfall annually. The driest parts of the country in terms of rainfall can be found in
the geographical central zones (map 5). This reflects the severe land degradation issue in these zones
(map 3).
Map 5: Average annual precipitation in Tanzania
FAO [online], 2006
Drought contributes not only to a decrease in availability of drinking water, but also to increasing
distances to cover in order to fetch drinking water. In 2001, 55% of the Tanzanian HHs had access to
drinking water within one kilometre (NBS, 2001). The decrease in quality of drinking water is another
issue, which is becoming more prevalent in Tanzania. This is related to pollution, which is especially a
major issue in urban areas. Inefficient management and dumping of wastes are the most important causes
for pollution in Tanzania. This results in both contaminated water and air and is a major threat to the
environment and the health of the population (LEAT, 2007). Air pollution on the HH level is becoming
worse, especially for women and children, as they often cook indoors on traditional fire wood stoves,
which release a relatively large amount of smoke. This indoor pollution is becoming a worse problem
than air pollution in cities (Schmitz, 2007).
§1.2 Population
This section focuses on the basic population dynamics of Tanzania. Further some indicators are given that
provide insight into the current situation of the population. Lastly, the gender dynamics are encompassed in
this section. Gender refers to relations between men and women and their roles in society.
475-724
725-974
975-1474
1475-2474
Average precipitation mm/year

10
§1.2.1 Population Dynamics
Between the years 1967 and 2002, the population of Tanzania has almost tripled. In the population census
held in Tanzania in 2002, 34,569,232 persons were counted (figure 1). However the total population at the
moment is estimated at 37,223,025 people (Government of Tanzania, 2007a). The sex ratio for Tanzania
is 96 males for every 100 females.
Figure 1: Tanzanian population dynamics
34,6
23,1
17,5
12,3
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1967 1978 1988 2002
Years
Population(inmillions)
Source: Tanzania Population and HH Census [online], 2002
The rate of population growth varies from region to region. The average rates of growth for the period
1988 to 2002 range from 4.8 percent to 1.4 percent. There are different causes for the rates of growth. The
highest growth rates have been due to the influx of refugees. Further, all of the regions with high growth
rates are dominated by large urban areas. However, looking at rural/urban population distribution, it is
observed that the percentage of the population living in rural areas is 77 percent and the percentage living
in urban areas is 23 percent of the total population (Tanzania Population and HH Census, 2002). Further
there are varieties in the population density, expressed in the number of people per square km, from
region to region. People are particularly concentrated in Dar es Salaam Region (1793 persons per square
km) and the urban Northeaster part (1,700 persons per square km) (map 6).

11
Map 6: Population density in the year 2000
The population pyramid below (figure 2) shows the total population by age and sex. It shows a broad
based pyramid indicating high birth rates and death rates and a youthful age structure. This shape is
representative of the age/sex pyramid of most of the African countries.
Figure 2: Population structure of Tanzania in 2002
20 10 0 10 20
0-4
10-14
20-24
30-34
40-44
50-54
60-64
70-74
80+
Age
Population (in %)
MALE FEMALE
Source: The United Republic of Tanzania Population and Housing Census [online], 2002
0-2
3-10
11-20
21-50
51-100
101-200
201-500
501-1000
>1000
People per square km

12
According to the 2002 population census the average HH size, calculated by dividing the number of
persons by the total number of HHs, has decreased from 5.2 persons per HH in 1988 to 4.9 persons per
HH in 2002.
§1.2.2 Population indicators
Other relevant indicators comprise the Human Development Index (HDI), ranking Tanzania at place 162
out of 177 (HDI, 2006). First, life expectancy at birth was 46.3 years in 2004 and steadily rising (UNDP,
2006). The infant mortality is 73 deaths per 1,000 live births. Both life expectance and the infant mortality
are related to the percentage of the population infected with HIV/AIDS. In 2001, approximately
1,500,000 adults and children were infected. Second, a severe problem in Tanzania is the illiteracy of the
population. Only 69.4% of adults were literate in 2004 (Human Development Report, 2006). However,
the youth literacy rate is becoming higher and was 92 percent in 2002. The enrolment rate is no more than
59%, with only 7% in secondary school. Third, roughly half the population of 34,6 million in 2002
subsisted on less than US$ 0.65 per day, with 40% of Tanzanians unable to meet their basic daily needs,
which is a major socio-economic indicator (Tanzania National Population Census, 2002).
Map 7: Percentage of the population below the basic needs poverty line
NBS [online], 2005a
Map 7 provides an indication of the poverty level in Tanzania of basic needs. The share of regional
populations which do not meet their basic needs, such as shelter, food and cloths, is in general high.
Highest rates can be found in the regions of Singida and Lindi, where over half of the population do not
meet their basic needs. Northern Tanzania can be seen as average in this poverty line (NBS, 2005a).
10-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
Percentage category

13
§1.2.3 Gender issues
Gender refers to the social relationships between men and women. The government of Tanzania states
that it is committed to the eradication of all forms of discrimination against any person on the grounds of
gender as stipulated in the constitution.
Since its independence, Tanzania has made noteworthy efforts to address gender inequalities, mostly in
the domains of legal rights and representation as well as education. The government stresses the critical
role that women play in the political, social and economic life of the country. It has made women’s
empowerment a key policy issue and it has tried to reform discriminatory legislation in many sectors.
Despite all these efforts, women continue to experience a relative disadvantage compared to men during
their lives. According to the gender analysis of USAID (2007): “Sometimes as a result of restrictive
cultural traditions or discriminatory laws, sometimes from poverty, and sometimes both, girls and women
have been hampered in their efforts to go to school, enter some professions, avoid unwanted sexual
relations or marriage, inherit property, obtain credit, achieve positions of political power, or otherwise
participate as full and equal partners in society”.
The education sector is one of the best examples of the complication of achieving gender equality even
though the policy environment is positive. In 1978, all children were required to begin school by age
seven. Despite of rising literacy rates, girls’ literacy (57%) continues to be lower than that for boys (80%).
Despite significant efforts in adult education in the past, a similar gap exists among adult women (54.3%-
64%) and adult men (78.8%-83%). Enrolment rates at secondary, university and technical colleges are
also unbalanced (e.g., 17% women to 83% men at the University of Dar es Salaam in 1994/5) (USAID,
2007, pp.4).
§1.3 National economy
Tanzania’s economy is highly dependent on agricultural activities. This section discusses briefly economic
developments and focuses on an important sector: livestock framing. During the 1980s, Tanzania modified its
economy from a socialistic centrally planned to a market-oriented economy. These structural reforms resulted
in liberalization of trade, exchange and interest rates. Additionally, over half of the four hundred parastatal
institutions were shut down or commercialised. In the 1990s the reorganization efforts continued with for
example investments in special areas of attention, like the educational, health, agricultural, water and road
sectors. In recent years, macroeconomic stability in Tanzania has increased, which is reflected in the
country’s economic growth levels of four percent on average. Nevertheless, the government has difficulties to
exploit this stability, in combination with relatively large international donor support, in employment
opportunities and eventually improving the living standards of its population. Therefore, the economy of
Tanzania can still be characterized as a low-income rural economy (FAO & AGAL, 2005).

14
Tanzania’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) grew in 2005 by 6.8% compared to a growth rate of 6.7% in 2004
and 5.7% in 2003. In comparison to Sub-Sahara Africa, the growth was 5.7% in 2005 (World Bank, 2007).
The structure of Tanzania’s economy is characterised by a high share of agricultural activities (table 1 &
annex 2).
Table 1: Economic structure of Tanzania
Contribution to GDP (in %) Growth rate (in %)
Economic sector 2003 2004 2005 2003 2004 2005
Agriculture 45.0 46.3 45.6 4.0 5.8 5.2
Industry 14.9 17.4 18.2 37.6 34.8 36.6
Services 41.9 40.7 40.8 24.9 27 30.1
Minus: financial services
indirectly measured
-1.8 -4.4 -4.6
Total 100.00 100.0 100.0
Source: Ministry of Planning, Economy and Empowerment [online], 2006
The service sector in Tanzania continued with a strong growth rate in trade, which includes tourism revenues.
The industrial sector in Tanzania deals primarily with processing agricultural goods and basic consumer
items. This economic pillar is currently characterised by high growth rates in manufacturing, construction and
in particular mining & quarrying, what causes a growth in energy consumption.
The high dependence on agriculture is also reflected in other indicators, as the sector provided 85% of the
export revenues in 2005 and employed 80% of the work force. Therefore, the economy is highly vulnerable to
external factors, like heavy rainfalls or droughts, which can influence the production tremendously. Due to
topography and climatic conditions only four percent of the total land area is used for cultivation of cash
crops, of which cotton, coffee and tobacco were the main export crops in 2005 (CIA Factbook, 2007).
However, production of food crops accounts for the largest part of the agricultural sector, as the larger par of
the population is active in subsistence farming. Major staple crops include for example maize, sorghum,
cassava and bananas. Additionally, livestock farming forms an important part of the agricultural sector (The
United Republic of Tanzania, [year unknown]).
§1.3.1 Livestock farming
Around 99% of the livestock sector belongs to traditional owners (the other percent implies big ranches
and dairy farms) and it accounts for approximately 30% of the agricultural GDP. Of the rural population,
28.9% owns one or more cattle or other large livestock. Next to the fact that the livestock sector
contributes to the national food supply, it provides also a way to obtain cash income or to have an
inflation-free value stock. In the year 2002, more then a quarter of all cattle were used for dairy
production. Therefore the assumptions can be made that animal husbandry in stables is on a relatively
high level. Table 2 provides an overview of livestock population in abstract numbers and annual growth
rates.

15
Table 2: Livestock population (in thousands) and growth rates
Year
Average annual growth
rate (in %)
Type
1980 1990 2000 2002 1980-1990 1990-2000
Cattle 12,578 13,047 16,713 17,367 0.4 2.5
Poultry 18,100 21,700 29,048 30,320 1.8 3.0
Sheep and goats 9,437 12,083 15,390 15,839 2.5 2.4
Pigs 160 320 450 458 7.2 3.5
In the North around Arusha and Moshi, in the West around Bukoba, in the South around Mbeya and in
the vicinity of Dar es Salaam stock farming is frequently practiced with up to one hundred cows per
square km (map 8). Furthermore, on the Northern plains of Tanzania, where conditions are less adequate
for crop production, pastoralism is the main agricultural practice. Pastoralism refers to a way of farming,
where people with large herds of livestock are often on the move and searching for fresh water and
grazing lands.
Map 8: Livestock density in Tanzania
§1.4 Energy context
The growing population causes an increase in energy demand. This section provides the Tanzania’s energy
context and zooms in on the demand and supply side.
Biomass energy resources, which comprises of fire wood and charcoal from both natural forests and
plantations, account for 93% of the total energy consumption. Petroleum, hydropower and coal are the major
sources of commercial energy in the country. The electricity sub sector contributes for about 0.6% of total
energy consumption. Electricity is mainly generated from hydropower, which is prone to drought effects, so
0
<1
1-5
5-10
10-20
20-50
50-75
75-100
>100
water/no data
Animals per square km

16
some thermal power stations have been installed (Government of Tanzania, 2007b). With rising energy costs,
droughts and the dependence of the majority of the population on fire wood, the energy situation is getting
tense for Tanzania. A Household Baseline Survey (HBS) (Haskamp & Ingwe, 2005) conducted in the Arusha
region, shows that approximately 70% of the regional population indicates that their energy situation is
insufficient. The most important constraints were the lack of electricity and high costs for kerosene (a
colourless flammable hydrocarbon liquid). Even though, the demand for energy resources has increased
rapidly over the previous ten years due to increasing economic activities and population growth, Tanzania’s
low levels of industrialisation and development are reflected in the still relatively low energy demand and
supply.
§1.4.1 Energy demand
Figure 3 demonstrates the relative trends of Tanzania’s energy sector since the 1970s. Although the
amount of energy used per capita in Tanzania has been decreasing steadily since the beginning of the
1970s, the actual amount has increased more. This is especially due to the rapid population growth and
expanding industrial activities in this period (Earth Trends, 2003).
Figure 3: Relative trends in energy in Tanzania 1971-1999
Source: Earth Trends [online], 2003
The energy consumption in Tanzania depends on different sources. However the use of renewable energy
consists only of fuel wood consumption. Other renewable energy sources, for example biogas, liquid
biomass, solar and wind energy, are very insignificant. Consumption of fuel wood has not only increased
extensively compared to other categories, but it is still by far the most common type of energy use. The
other types of energy consumption are hydroelectric and fossil fuels. The latter consists almost totally for
crude oil and natural gas liquids. Nuclear energy is not prevalent in Tanzania at all.
The total amount of primary energy consumed per capita is 464.9 in kilograms of oil per person (Earth
Trends, 2003). HHs account for the largest part of energy consumption in Tanzania, namely 78.8% of the

17
countrywide use. Of the total consumption approximately 80% is utilized in rural areas. The major energy
end uses in the HH sector are cooking and lighting. Further end uses are brewing, smoking and ironing. In
rural areas, energy for cooking mainly existed of fire wood (93.4%), while charcoal for cooking is
relatively more used within HHs with a larger income. Energy for lighting in rural areas was dominated
by kerosene use (90.4%) followed by fire wood use (7.1%). Electricity for lighting in rural areas can
almost be neglected. In total about ten percent of the approximately six million HHs in Tanzania have
access to electricity (compared to the African average of 30%) with great differences between urban
(39%) and rural (2%) areas. In 2002 the per capita electricity consumption was 84 kWh (MEM, 2003).
The average annual fire wood consumption for cooking and lighting per HH each day is estimated on
seven kilograms (Haskamp & Ingwe, 2005). The rising trend in the international kerosene price worsens
the energy situation for HHs. Even the smallest changes in kerosene prices have a significant effect on the
livelihoods of the Tanzanian population (MEM, 2003).
Around the turn of the century, the industrial sector accounted for the second largest part of energy
consumption (11.6%) (Earth Trends, 2003). This is a sign that a lot of economic activities are related to
utilization of traditional technologies; especially in rural areas, where infrastructure and agricultural
practices are relatively inadequate.
§1.4.2 Energy supply
Between the years 1980 and 2000 the total amount of energy produced in the country has increased by
approximately 54%. In 2003 the total energy production is 16,027 thousands tonnes of oil (Earth Trends,
2003). The energy supply in Tanzania can be divided in renewable energy and non-renewable energy.
First of all, of the renewable energy sources electricity is produced the most. In 2003, the total electricity
production is 2,658 Gigawatt per hour (GWh). The electricity generation in the country is mainly done
through hydropower technologies.
Energy from water (hydro) is a very important source of electric power that currently accounts for about
67% of total available installed capacity (Sovereign Publications Limited, 2006). Other ways of
generating electricity in Tanzania is through processing natural gas and fuel oil. Together with
hydropower, this accounted in 2005 for approximately 950 Megawatt (MW). Of this amount
approximately more then 80% is generated through hydropower technologies. According to the Ministry
of Energy & Minerals (MEM) (2000), the electricity supply must be tripled in the next twenty years to
meet the demand from the population and the industrial, agricultural and private sectors. Very little
electricity is imported, but there are cross-border connections with Uganda and Zambia.
Biomass energy resources, also referred to as bio-fuels, are energy sources derived from living organisms.
Biomass resources can be classified into two major groups, namely as woody biomass and agro-forestry

18
waste (e.g. crop wastes or animal manure) (Makungu & Ng’wandu, [year unknown]). Forests in Tanzania
represent almost fifty percent of the country’s land area and obtaining the fuel wood is free, thus fuel
wood is the most widely used bio-fuel. Besides the supply of forests, the country has considerable
biomass resources in the form of agricultural residues, by-products from agro-industrial activities and
animal wastes (Probec, [year unknown]).
Solar, wind and geothermal power as input for renewable energy source are all upcoming energy sources
in Tanzania, but so far still very insignificant utilized in Tanzania compared to other energy sources.
Second, non-renewable energy sources are produced in Tanzania in the form of natural gas. The proven
natural gas is located at the SongoSongo Island offshore in the Indian Ocean. The gas reserves are
estimated to be 726 billion cubic feet (Souvereign Publications Limited, 2006). This number is limited in
the long-term perspective, so medium-term utilization of the gas is currently conducted. The gas is used
for electricity generation, thermal industrial appliances and petrochemical industries.
Petroleum is another important non-renewable energy source. In the year 2000 Tanzania utilized
approximately a quarter of its foreign currency earnings to finance the needed import of petroleum
products. That is approximately US$ 200 million. As Tanzania currently imports 100% of the fuel oil for
electricity and power generation, it seeks to sustain and expand oil exploration via support of the private
sector (Helio International, 2006).
The exploration of coal in Tanzania for energy use has been negligible, although it is one of the major
energy resources of the country. Recent studies indicate that Mchuchuma coal deposits can provide fuel
for between 35 and 40 years (Souvereign Publications Limited, 2006). It has mainly been used for
industrial purposes, but far less has been promoted for HHs use.
Possibilities for interconnection with neighbouring countries exist between Tanzania, Zambia, Kenya and
Uganda. The Kenyan system is seen as a likely export market in the long-term where Uganda and Zambia
would likely be sources of imports, primarily as of low cost hydro options that are available in those
countries (Souvereign Publications Limited, 2006).
§1.5 Governance
Tanzania is a United Republic which consists of the mainland and several offshore islands. This section
discusses major government polices and zooms in on forest management and energy polices.
Since obtaining independence in 1961, Tanzania was a frontrunner in experimenting with a form of African
socialism. This was initiated by the first president of the country, Julius Nyerere. After independence,
Tanzania had presidential and parliamentary elections each five year. Since 1985, the country followed a
maximum of two periods for presidency. In the 1970s it became clear that this form of socialism was not

19
fruitful for Tanzania. The following decades until the 1990s can be characterised by decentralisation efforts
and Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs), which were accompanied by economic decline and raising
debts.
In December 2005, J.M. Kikwete became the new president of the country (The United Republic of Tanzania,
[year unknown]). Tanzania’s current main government policies are expressed through several strategy
documents, of which Tanzania Development Vision 2025 and the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP)
are the most prominent. Vision 2025 is formulated in the second half of the 1990s to assist in guiding
economic and social reforms that have been introduced since the second half of the 1980s. It has three main
objectives, namely “… achieving quality and good life for all; good governance and the rule of law; and
building a strong and resilient economy that can effectively withstand global competition” (Planning
Commission, [year unknown]). Consistent with the ambitions of Vision 2025, the PRSP of 2005 aims at
improvement of three clusters, namely: growth and reduction of income poverty; quality of life and social
well-being; and governance and accountability (IMF, 2006). The PRSP is for Tanzania, and many other
developing countries, the operational basis to lend credits or to receive debt relief from the World Bank (WB)
and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). This concept resulted from the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries
Initiative (HIPC), which aims at reducing the debts of developing countries. The WB, IMF and other donors
participate in formulating the PRSP.
After the introduction of the HIPC Initiative in the 1990s, Tanzania became one of the first candidates for the
PRSP approach, which can be characterized as a tool to develop a ‘partnership’ form of aid. The country had
for example already formulated its own poverty reduction strategy, in the form of Development Vision 2025.
This contributed to a proper relationship between the central government and donors in order to improve a
‘partnership’ form of aid. Tanzania became more dependent on this form of assistance resulting in adoption
and implementation of donor conditions, through the country’s strategy papers, often related to
decentralization processes, ‘good governance’ and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Therefore, it
is often mentioned that Tanzania has become a ‘donor’s darling’ (Harrison & Mulley, 2007). Decentralization
efforts in Tanzania resulted in increasing local authorities’ capacities and responsibilities in order to deliver
public services. The country has currently 26 administrative regions, of which 21 are situated on the
mainland, and 127 districts (Wikipedia, 2007). In the beginning of the 21st
century approximately one fifth of
the development assistance to Tanzania still came in the form of isolated projects. This is characteristic for
Tanzania, which appears to function as a ‘playing field’ for international donors (Harrison & Mulley, 2007).
The strong dependence on development assistance lies at the centre of the political system in Tanzania. This
is reflected in government revenues and expenditures, which are characterized by a trade deficit. The country
received in 2005 for example US$ 406.8 million under the HIPC Initiative alone, which accounts for
approximately one fourth of the total debt relief in the same year. Government expenditures in that year were
approximately over US$ 3 billion. The composition of these expenditures is in line with the main policy
statements of Vision 2025 and the PRSP. In the context of this research, expenditures for environmental and
energy issues are relatively low. Other government affairs, for example education, health and housing are

20
given higher priority (Ministry of Planning, Economy & Empowerment, 2006). This can be identified as
typical, knowing that 90% of the energy supply is retrieved from biomass resources, especially forests.
§1.5.1 Forest management
Forest management in Tanzania is mainly done by the Forestry and Beekeeping Division (FBD) under the
Ministry of Natural Resources & Tourism (MNRT). The national policy on forestry of 1998 emphasizes
participation of different stakeholder in managing forest resources. By means of the Forestry Act from
2002, these participation efforts are legalized in two strategies: ‘Community Based Forest Management’
(CBFM) and ‘Joint Forest Management’ (JFM). The major difference is that CBFM involves village or
private lands, whereas JFM is concerned with governmental reserved lands (FBD & MNRT, 2006). Two
main problems that occur are related to fragmentation of management authorities in these strategies and
the sparsely spread of forest resources, which therefore is hard to manage. Both problems are reflected in
over-exploitation as many need the forests as a source for energy (Kihiyo, 1998).
§1.5.2 Energy policies
One of the goals of the PRSP’s major pillar related to economic growth and reduction of income poverty
is to “… [provide] reliable, affordable and efficient energy and alternative rural energy schemes” (IMF,
2006). The aim is to guarantee efficient power supply, preferably through promotion of domestic energy
sources, to consumers by means of liberalizing the power sector. This is reflected in the National Energy
Policy of 2003, as well as in national forest and environmental policies, which puts more emphasises on
market mechanisms and efficiency of the energy sector. The aim in formulating policy plans is the
incorporation of government interest as well as market actors and energy consumers (MEM, 2003).
The focus of same major challenges in Tanzania’s energy situation is especially on the rural areas,
because the majority of HHs is located here. There dependence on fire wood for cooking and relatively
expensive kerosene for lighting, which are accompanied with several negative consequences, is huge. The
energy policy states that improving the energy capacity for these HHs can lead to several benefits,
especially for women and the environment, but no concrete policy implication are formulated in this
respect (MEM, 2003). The policy statements focusing on renewable energy sources are mainly aiming at
the creation of an institutional framework in order to let this sector grow, especially in rural areas.
Examples of efforts that have been taken are the formulation of a Rural Energy Act in 2005, which
implies the establishment of a Rural Energy Agency (REA) and a Rural Energy Fund (REF) (box 1)
(MEM, 2003).

Biogas_Viable_or_Not_feasibility_study_Tanzania_2007

Biogas_Viable_or_Not_feasibility_study_Tanzania_2007

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Biogas_Viable_or_Not_feasibility_study_Tanzania_2007

Similar to Biogas_Viable_or_Not_feasibility_study_Tanzania_2007 (20)

Biogas_Viable_or_Not_feasibility_study_Tanzania_2007