Pergamon

Copyright Prtnted in Great

199.5 Elxvw Britain. All

Science rights $Y.SO

Ltd + O.(K)

revzrved

0360-544ZY.5

RESIDENTIAL

ENERGY USE PATTERNS PHILIPPINES

G. BENSELt$ and ELIZABETH

IN CEBU CITY,

TERRENCE

M. REMEDIOg

iDepartment of Environmental Science, Allegheny College, Meadville, PA 16335, U.S.A. and rjAftiliated Non-Conventional Energy Center, University of San Carlos. Cebu City 6000, Philippines (Received 15 July 1994)

Abstract-Results of a comprehensive survey of residential sector energy use in the second largest urban center in the Philippines are presented. A total of 603 households were interviewed regarding their energy consumption and purchase patterns, fuel-switching history, and reasons for fuel-choice selection. LPG and fuelwood are the most widely-used cooking fuels in the residential sector, followed in importance by kerosene, charcoal and electricity. Multiple cooking fuel use is widespread. Electricity is used in 93% of the city s households, primarily for lighting and appliances. Average household electricity consumption increases 1500% between the lowest and highest income groups, indicating that future growth in residential electricity demand could be rapid under conditions of rising living standards. Economies of scale in household energy consumption, percentage of household income going to energy purchases, and the impact of fuel-switching and commercial food vendors on the types and amounts of energy consumed in the residential sector are also discussed.

INTRODUCTION

The share of the developing world s population residing in cities has doubled from 17% in 1950 to 34% in 1990. This figure is expected to reach 40% by the year 2000 when two billion people will be living in developing country urban areas, and 43 of 59 cities in the world with populations exceeding five million will be located in developing regions. . The rapid pace of urbanization in developing countries generates fundamental changes in energy and material use patterns, as well as in the composition and concentration of pollution and waste flow~. -~ Improved understanding of urban energy systems is an essential requirement in assessing the local, regional and global environmental impacts of urbanization and urban energy use, as well as in designing policies and technologies which can help to mitigate these impacts. We present results of a comprehensive survey of household energy use in the second largest urban center in the Philippines, the Cebu City metropolitan area. A total of 603 households in the 49 urban barangaysa of Cebu City were interviewed between February and May 1992 regarding their energy purchase and utilization patterns. Respondent households were chosen on a random basis from the master lists of the government s 1990 Census of Population and Housing.11 The primary objectives of this survey were to (i) quantify household consumption of fuelwood, charcoal, kerosene, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), electricity and other fuels and (ii) determine the major social, economic, cultural and environmental factors that drive fuel-choice and fuel-use patterns in the residential sector.

THE STUDY

SITE

Cebu City is the capital of the island province of Cebu, located 550 km south-east of Manila in the center of the Visayan Island region. Its 1990 population stood at 6 10,4 17, with the Cebu City metropolitan area, including Cebu, Mandaue and Lapu-Lapu Cities, as well as two adjacent municipalities, having a combined population of I.1 million. Between 1980 and 1990, the population of Metro Cebu grew
$To whom all correspondence should be addressed. TA barangay is the smallest political unit in the Philippines. Cebu City consists of 80 barangays. 31 of which are relatively remote and located in the mountains west of the city. The 1990 population of the 49 urban barangays studied was 549,663. l/Details of survey design and implementation. as well as an outline of the questionnaire used in the survey. can be requested from the lead author. 173

174

Terrence

G. Bensel and Elizabeth M. Remedio

at an average rate of 3. I % per annum, compared with rural population growth rates in the province of 1.9% and a national average of 2.3%.. Since 1987, Metro Cebu has experienced rapid economic growth, with some indicators pointing to J Future development plans for the city and growth rates as high as 15% per annum in recent years. province are based primarily on an expansion of industrial and manufacturing activity, including an increase in the number and size of special industrial zones and export processing zones. Continued upgrading and improvement of Cebu s infrastructure, and expansion of the island s international air and sea port facilities, will likely strengthen Cebu s status as the premier city and commercial and trading center of the southern Philippines. The rapid pace of economic development in Metro Cebu has also served to attract an increasing number of migrants from rural areas of the province, as well as from surrounding islands. This influx is threatening to overwhelm new job creation, and is straining already inadequate infrastructure and social services in many parts of the city. Urban population growth and rural-urban migration are worsening the crowded conditions found in Cebu s low-income squatter districts. Basic services in these areas, including water, sewage, waste disposal and power, are sorely lacking, and their absence is believed to contribute to relatively high rates of infant mortality and morbidity in these communities. 4 Traffic congestion, crime, solid waste problems, air pollution, water pollution, and power shortages have also worsened in recent years.
RESIDENTIAL SECTOR ENERGY USE

Residential sector energy consumption accounts for 45% of overall energy use in developing countries.15 This consumption includes high rates of biomass fuel use on a relatively inefficient basis in rural regions, but even in highly urbanized settings the residential sector can still account for over half of total energy use.4 The largest portion of residential sector energy use in developing countries goes towards food preparation, which accounts for 85% of the total in Brazil, 91% in India, and 97% in Kenya. I5 Increased urbanization and rising incomes tend to alter these shares,6 with electricity use for lighting and appliances making up a larger portion of household energy consumption, Rapid growth in residential sector electricity demand, such as the lo-15% annual increases experienced in recent years in a number of Asian developing nations, poses serious problems for energy planners. Besides the need to add new capacity to simply keep up with growing demand, residential sector electricity use is characterized by large peaks during morning and evening hours, complicating load management and necessitating the installation and use of relatively expensive peaking power facilities.16* A careful analysis and quantification of residential energy use in Cebu is important for a number of reasons. First, Cebu is experiencing annual increases in electricity demand of from 9.2 to 11.4%, * and the residential sector is responsible for much of this increase. I9 Second, local government officials are concerned that high levels of urban fuelwood and charcoal demand may be having negative impacts on Cebu s rural environment, although research conducted by these authors indicates that urban woodfuel demand may actually be promoting more widespread reforestation and agroforestry practices in the uplands.20.2 Either way, a better understanding of woodfuel consumption patterns in the residential sector is important for rural resource planning. Third, increased substitution of kerosene and LPG for woodfuels in the residential sector of medium-sized cities like Cebu has implications for the Philippines balance of payments picture since 99.5% of the nation s oil requirements are met through imports.
COOKING FUEL CONSUMPTION

Three-fourths of low-income households in Cebu rely on fuelwood or charcoal as their primary cooking fuel, while over 80% in the highest-income category use LPG (Table I). The percentage of households using kerosene as their primary cooking fuel increases in the lower-middle and middleincome categories, then sharply declines in importance after that (Table 1). Besides a single primary cooking fuel, many households in Cebu make use of one or more secondary fuels for supplemental purposes, as a backup, or for fuel-specific cooking activities (Table 2). Charcoal, for example, is used as a primary cooking fuel in only 5.6% of the city s households (Table I), but it

Residential energy use patterns Table I. Primary cooking fuels in the residential sector of Cebu City (in percent), 1992.

Cooking

Fuel

<2,000

2-4,999

Fuelwood* (n;y) . (n=$5) . Charcoal 9.8 6.4 Kerosene 15.9 25.5 LPG 4.9 24.7 Electricity 1.2 0.0 WF/Kero. 2.4 2.6 WF/Ll GI 0.0 0.4 Not Cooking 1.2 1.3 Total 100.0 100.0 t. Incomes reported in Philippine Pesos (P), US$l=PE

Monthly Income Range? 5-9,999 lo-19,999 Z20,OOO Overall (n=165) (n=83) (n=38) (n=603) 23.1 10.9 0.0 31.8 4.8 2.4 2.6 5.6 21.8 9.6 5.3 19.9 46.7 72.3 81.6 38.0 0.0 2.4 7.9 1.0 1.8 1.2 2.6 2.2 1.8 1.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

+ Includes households using sawdust, coconut husks and shells, and other types of biomass fuels except for charcoal. 5 Households which use either fuelwood or charcoal and kerosene near equally. (I Households which use either fuelwood or charcoal and LPG near equally.

is widely used for grilling, of the total (Table 2). A. Fuelwood

slow cooking of soups, and for other specialized

cooking

tasks in 53.4%

Fuelwood is the primary cooking fuel for 3 1.8% of Cebu s households (Table 1), and is used on at least a supplemental basis in 45.9% of the total (Table 2). Residential sector fuelwood consumption in the 49 urban barangays of Cebu City in 1992 amounted to an estimated 55,828 metric tons, approximately 143,000 barrels of fuel-oil equivalent (BFOE), or 893 terajoules (TJ) of energy on a delivered basis. Most fuelwood consumption occurs in households with monthly incomes of less than 10,000 Philippine Pesos (P),l_ although fuelwood is still utilized on at least a supplemental basis by nearly one-fourth of households with incomes higher than that (Table 2). Approximately 64% of the fuelwood consumed in the residential sector is purchased by households from urban-based wholesalers, retailers and itinerant vendors. Fuelwood is generally sold to households in bundles of well-split, well-dried pieces at a per unit price of around P 1.50/kg. On average, fuelwoodusing households purchase this fuel six times a week, with frequency of purchase generally higher among low-income households in densely populated squatter settlements where wood is available in bundles weighing as little as 0.6 kg, enough to cook a small pot of rice. Families in these areas lack the space to store wood, and the nature of their household budget (highly constrained cash flows) limits their ability to purchase fuelwood in larger quantities even if this would tend to reduce per unit costs. 95.6% of households purchasing fuelwood are able to obtain regular supplies within 1 km of their residence. Another 17.5% of the fuelwood consumed in the residential sector is delivered directly to households,

Table 2. Percentage

of households using cooking fuels on either a primary or secondary basis, Cebu City, 1992.

Cooking Fuelwood Charcoal Kerosene LPG Electricity

Fuel

Monthly Income Range (P) <2,000 2-4,999 $9,999 lo-19,999 >20,000 (n=82) (n=235) (n=165) (n=83) (n=38) 69.5 54.0 38.2 28.9 13.2 28.0 54.0 54.5 66.3 73.7 22.0 38.7 35.2 14.5 10.5 6.1 26.4 50.9 78.3 89.5 1.2 2.6 9.7 22.9 47.4

Overall (n=603) 45.9 53.4 30.3 41.6 10.0

i-ln 1992. US$I =P25.

176

Terrence G.

Benseland Elizabeth M. Remedio

either by rural traders or fuelwood-cutters. Households having fuelwood delivered generally operate some form of business on the premises, such as an eatery, which requires fairly substantial quantities of this fuel. The remaining 18.4% of residential fuelwood requirements are met by wood that is freelygathered or collected from the urban environment. Many households obtain scrap wood from construction or demolition activities occurring on or near their premises, or from household members working in lumber yards, construction sites, or as a carpenter. Others collect wood from vacant lots, garbage dumps, parks, and along riverbanks and the seacoast. Slightly over half (53.6%) of all fuelwood-using households make some use of scrap or other freely-gathered wood, and 20.3% are able to meet all of their fuelwood requirements in this fashion. Less than two-thirds of the fuelwood consumed in Cebu is actually in the form of woody biomass originating from trees and shrubs grown in rural areas of the province. Scrap wood, both purchased and freely collected, accounts for 19% of the total. Non-woody coconut fronds meet 16% of total consumption, and are sold in urban markets for 20-30% less per unit than regular fuelwood. The remaining 2% of residential fuelwood demand is accounted for by bamboo, which is both purchased from dealers and freely gathered along riverbanks and the seacoast. For households using fuelwood as their primary cooking fuel, average per capita consumption levels are 303 kg (4.8 GJ)/annum, and average household consumption levels are 1757 kg (28.1 GJ)/annum. Per capita fuelwood requirements are slightly lower in Cebu than those reported in other developing country energy studies.- This could be due to the fairly common practice of multiple fuel use in Cebu s residential sector, which tends to depress consumption levels of the primary cooking fuel. In addition, the frequency of meal purchases from commercial food vendors is quite high among lowincome households (see below), and since many of these households use fuelwood as their primary cooking fuel this could be reducing per capita consumption. Average per capita fuelwood consumption drops from around 40 kg/month in households with one or two members, to only around 12 kg/month for households with nine or more members (see Fig. 1). This tendency towards scale economies in fuelwood consumption has been observed in other developing country urban settings,24.28- and is an important consideration in projecting future levels of woodfuel demand since it implies that demographic changes that alter household structure need to be considered. Households using fuelwood as their primary cooking fuel spent an average of only 3.4% of their monthly income on purchases of this fuel, although this figure was much higher for some households in the lowest income category. The low average figure is due in part to the widespread practice of using scrap and other freely gathered wood. Among low-income households, 44% of all fuelwood used is freely gathered. Respondents gave a variety of reasons besides income for their decision to utilize fuelwood. A preference for the taste of food cooked with wood was the most common. Next was a perception of fuelwood as an inexpensive fuel, although by this many respondents were referring to the overall economics of using wood-including stove costs and ability to purchase in small quantities. Ease of purchase was cited by 33.9% of respondents, with most households reportedly able to purchase fuelwood
__
70 60 50 2 30 3 40 20 ji 10 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 ) z-10

Number of household members Fig. I. Household size and monthly per capita fuelwood consumption (in kg) for households using fuelwood as their primary cooking fuel, Cebu City, 1992. Central boxes extend from the tirst to the third quartile. The horizontal line within each box represents the median. the square indicates the mean. Vertical lines extending from the central box reach from the 10th percentile to the 90th percentile. Outliers beyond these points are not shown, although they are included in the calculation of the mean, median and other statistics.

Residential

energy use pattcrns

177

in affordable bundles within a few hundred meters from their residence. Close to one-third of respondents cited an access to free supplies of scrap wood. Other reasons given were that fuelwood gives off more heat and is better for certain types of cooking, and that fuelwood stoves are inexpensive or can be made for free.
B. Charcoal

Charcoal is the primary cooking fuel for 5.6% of Cebu s households (Table I), and is used on at least a secondary basis in 53.4% of the total (Table 2). Aggregate charcoal consumption in the residential sector in 1992 is estimated at 7966 metric tons, approximately 38,237 BFOE or 239 TJ.? Although low-income households are more likely to rely on charcoal as their primary cooking fuel, the proportion of households utilizing this fuel on at least a secondary basis actually increases with income (Table 2) due to the fairly widespread practice in high-income households of using charcoal to cook rice and for grilling meats and fish. Most households purchase charcoal in cellophane bags weighing under 1 kg, at an average per unit price of PS/kg. These bags are available in neighborhood stores and from itinerant charcoal vendors. 94.4% of households using charcoal reported being able to purchase this fuel within 1 km from their residence. Households making greater use of charcoal for family cooking or for commercial purposes, as well as high-income families, generally purchase charcoal by the sack, either from urban traders or from rural traders who deliver this fuel directly to them. Sacks of charcoal typically weigh 15- 16 kg each, and sell for around P60/sack. For households using charcoal as their primary cooking fuel, average per capita consumption levels are 65 kg ( 1.95 GJ)/annum, and average household consumption levels are 380 kg ( 11.4 GJ)/annum. Most households using charcoal also supplement this with fuelwood and kerosene. Per capita monthly charcoal consumption drops from around IO kg in households with three members or less, to 4.8 kg in households with more than six people. Households using charcoal as their primary cooking fuel spent an average of 4.9% of their monthly income on purchases of this fuel, although this figure varied from less than 1% for high-income households up to 16% for a number of low-income families.
C. Kerosene

Kerosene is the primary cooking fuel for 19.9% of Cebu s households (Table l), and is used on at least a secondary basis in 30.3% of the total (Table 2). Kerosene is also used in small quantities by 62.5% of the city s households for lamps used during electric power outages, as well as a fire-starter in many fuelwood and charcoal-using households. Residential sector kerosene consumption in 1992 is estimated at 6.6 million liters, approximately 36,036 BFOE or 225 TJ. Kerosene is most widely used in the lower-middle and middle income categories, a pattern that supports the notion of kerosene as a transition fuel between woodfuels and LPG. Kerosene is widely available throughout the city, with 83.8% of households reportedly able to purchase this fuel within 1 km of their residence. Kerosene is least expensive when purchased by the liter from formal sector service stations (the average official price in 1992 was around P7SO/liter), but the greatest number of households purchase this fuel from neighborhood stores which also sell by the liter (typically for around PIO) as well as in quantities as small as 50 ml at a per unit price as high as P20/liter. Kerosene purchase patterns are similar to those observed for fuelwood and charcoal, with relatively low-income households tending to purchase smaller quantities on a more frequent basis (often i-2 times a day) but at a higher per unit cost. For households using kerosene as their primary cooking fuel, average per capita and household consumption levels are 37 liters ( 1.3 GJ) and 197 liters (6.9 GJ) per annum, respectively. One-fourth of households using kerosene also utilize fuelwood on a supplemental basis (on average seven times a month), and 10% use charcoal (on average four times a month). A common practice is to use fuelwood or charcoal for cooking one large pot of rice to last the day, while a kerosene stove is utilized in preparing or heating up vegetable, fish or meat side dishes at each meal. Average per capita kerosene consumption drops from 4.5 liters a month in households with less than three members, to 2.5 liters a month in those with more than five. Households using kerosene spent

fRoughly

one-third

(2481

tons) of the charcoal

used in Cebu s reGdential

\ector

was for Ironing

rather than for cooking

178

Terrence G.

Bensel and Elizabeth M. Remedio

an average of 2.9% of their monthly income on this fuel, although for some families in the low-income group this figure was as high as 15-20%. The higher share of monthly income going to kerosene purchases in low-income households is a result both of lower overall incomes as well as higher per unit prices paid by these families due to their purchasing in smaller quantities from neighborhood stores. Households using kerosene cited the convenience of this fuel relative to fuelwood, and its affordability relative to LPG, as the most important factors in their decision. Locally-made kerosene stoves can be purchased new for P200-300, re-built stoves sell for as low as PlOO. In addition, the use of kerosene as a cooking fuel does not generate smoke, an important consideration in densely populated low-income settlements. That many low- and middle-income households continue to use fuelwood instead of kerosene is largely a result of perceived taste differences between foods cooked with kerosene and wood, as well as concern over kerosene stove safety, rather than because of fuel/stove costs or availability.
D. Liquejied petroleum gas

LPG is the primary cooking fuel for 38% of Cebu s households (Table l), and is used at least as a secondary fuel by 41.6% of the total (Table 2). The small percentage difference between households using LPG as their primary cooking fuel and those using it on at least a secondary basis suggests that once a household obtains the equipment necessary to utilize LPG they rely on this fuel for the largest portion of their household cooking energy requirements. Residential sector LPG use in 1992 is estimated at 5787 tons, approximately 41,840 BFOE or 262 TJ. LPG is most widely used in the middle, uppermiddle, and upper-income categories, although close to one-fourth of lower-middle income households are also able to afford its use. The three major oil companies operating in the Philippines market LPG under their own brand names and in non-transferable cylinders. A number of local bottlers also buy in bulk from the oil companies and then market their own brands. Three-fourths (75.6%) of LPG-using households bring their empty cylinders to service stations to be replaced, with the rest having replacement bottles delivered. Although LPG delivery services are available in most parts of the city, these have a reputation for under-filling bottles. In addition, after running out of fuel a household usually has to wait l-2 days before a replacement is delivered, and since most cannot afford to keep two cylinders on a rotating basis they are forced to bring their tanks to service stations. Replacing empty LPG canisters is perhaps the only major inconvenience associated with using this fuel, especially since most LPG-using households have to travel over 2 km to have this done. The fact that upper-middle and upper-income households usually rely on household help to do this for them makes this less of an issue. For households using LPG as their primary cooking fuel, average per capita and household consumption levels are 24 kg (1.1 GJ) and 138 kg (6.2 GJ) per annum, respectively. Nearly 30% of households using LPG also use charcoal for supplemental cooking purposes (on average 14 times a month). A fairly common practice (even among high-income households) is to use charcoal for cooking rice, primarily for taste reasons, while LPG is used for the balance of the cooking. Since most cooking in high-income households is done by hired servants, the relative inconvenience associated with using charcoal is less of a problem. One in 10 LPG-using households also utilize an electric stove or burner,? while 16.5% make use of an electric rice cooker, on average over ten times a month. Average per capita LPG consumption declines from 3.2 kg a month in households with less than three members, to 1.6 kg a month in those with more than six. LPG-using households spend an average of only 2% of their monthly income on purchases of this fuel. Even for households earning less than P50OO/month this figure only averaged 3.8%, suggesting that LPG fuel purchases (exclusive of stove and equipment costs) are not a major expense even for low-income families. LPG is the most preferred household cooking fuel in urban Cebu. It is more convenient and clean
to use than other available cooking fuels, and it does not generally impart a bad aroma or oily taste to food as is commonly said to happen with kerosene. However, LPG stove costs and the lumpy nature of payments for this fuel continue to preclude many low-income households from using it. Depending on the model and size, a new LPG stove can cost anywhere from P800-10,000. Purchase of an LPG cylinder requires another PlOOO or a hefty deposit. Even if low-income households could afford such a purchase, the need to buy LPG 11 kg at a time, requiring a lump-sum payment of P130-

Some

LPG stove/oven combinations have an electric burner built into them as the fourth unit on top.

Residential

energy use patterns

179

Fig. 2. Monthly

frequency

of household

meal purchases from commercial

food vendors, Cebu Ctty.

1992

140, discourages many from using this fuel. Fear of fire or explosion, and the high risk of an LPG stove or cylinder being stolen, were also cited as reasons for not using this fuel. Rising incomes, new one-burner mini-LPG stove designs, and marketing of 6 kg LPG canisters, could serve to help overcome some of these obstacles in the future.

IMPACT

OF PREPARED

FOOD

PURCHASES

ON COOKING

FUEL

USE

An increasing reliance on purchased meals and foods cooked outside the home is a common trend in many urbanizing regions of Asia and the developing world.3 -3h This trend is due in part to increased female participation in the wage-paying workforce, leaving less time for marketing and meal preparation. Since commercial food vendors generally cook large quantities of food they could be achieving scale economies in energy use, thereby reducing overall per capita energy requirements for meal preparation. In Cebu, the largest concentration of commercial food vendors can be found in low-income districts and in areas where there are factories, schools, or government offices. Average frequency of meal purchases from commercial food vendors is highest among low-income households (Fig. 2), with over 40% of households in the lowest-income group purchasing from food vendors at least once a day, while close to one-fourth patronize these vendors at least twice dai1y.t Frequency of meal purchases from commercial food vendors also varies with settlement pattern (Table 3). In less populated peri-urban districts, households purchase meals from food vendors 14.2 times per month on average, with low-income households showing a greater tendency towards these purchases. In 13 inner-city districts analyzed, average monthly meal purchases increase to over 30. with low-income households in these areas averaging 37 purchases per month. We attribute these differences to a combination of factors. First, members of low-income households in densely-populated districts are often involved in both formal and informal sector economic activity, leaving less time for meal preparation. Second, the close spacing of housing units in densely-populated regions of the city can preclude regular use of fuelwood due to problems with smoke. At the same time, low-income families in these areas are often unable to purchase kerosene or LPG stoves, forcing them to resort to purchasing meals from food vendors. Increased meal purchases from commercial food vendors could be having an impact on cooking fuel
Table 3. Average monthly frequency of meal purchases from commercial food vendors in Cebu City, by income category and settlement pattern. 1992.

Settlement Pattern Peri-Urban (9 districts, n=166) Densely-Populated (13 distri@s, n=133)

Monthly Income Range (P) <2,000 Z-4,999 59,999 lo-19,999 120,000 15.6 17.3 15.6 6.1 7.2 37.2 33.8 31.3 19.8 6.8

Overall 14.2 30.1

fThese purchases represent food that is purchased and then conwmcd on the household purchases from food vendors by household members eating ofl the premix\.

premw\.

and doe\

not account

lor

180

TerrenceG. BenselandElizabeth M. Remedio

demand in the city, and especially on levels of fuelwood use. This is because food vendors sell mainly to low-income households, most of whom rely on fuelwood, as well as because 70% of food vendors Whether overall levels of fuelwood consumption will decline in the city use fuelwood themselves. 20,37 due to economies of scale in use is uncertain, although evidence from other developing countries29~38 and from Cebu (see Fig. 1) suggests that as household size-and presumably the amount of food being cooked-increases, per capita fuelwood use declines substantially. FUEL-SWITCHING A widely-reported phenomenon in developing country urban energy studies is that of a household fuel-switching transition from traditional biomass to more modern cooking fuels like kerosene, LPG and electricity.6*32.39-42 A number of factors are posited to be behind fuel-switching trends, namely, increasing incomes, improved availability and access to modern fuels, and basic changes in urban lifestyles and settlement patterns which make cleaner, more compact fuels such as kerosene and LPG more attractive to residential users. Generally speaking, the extent to which a fuel-switching transition occurs in a given urban area is determined by the availability of different fuels and the level of economic development. In cities like Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur and Manila, only a small percentage of households still use biomass.34*39,43 In smaller cities like Cebu, or in cities located in relatively low-income countries such as Port-auPrince, Haiti or Kano, Nigeria, woodfuels still meet a large share of household cooking energy requirements.25*44s45 Residential fuel-switching is often non-discrete, even after a household has switched to LPG or kerosene they may still make extensive use of woodfuels. In addition, reverse fuel-switching has also been known to occur under deteriorating economic conditions or during periods of oil supply uncertainty.4*33*46 Since 1960, there has been a steady trend away from woodfuels and towards more widespread use of LPG and kerosene in Cebu s residential sector (Fig. 3). The most rapid change occurred between 1960 and 1970, at a time of low oil prices and improved availability of petroleum products. This trend slowed between 1970 and 1980, a period of sharp oil price increases and occasional shortages of petroleum products. Between 1980 and 1990 the percentage of households using woodfuel dropped sharply again, with increased kerosene usage accounting for much of the difference (Fig. 3). Despite a 50% decline between 1960 and 1990 in the proportion of households using woodfuels, the absolute number of households relying on these fuels has increased by close to 10,000 over the same period due to a tripling of the city s population (see Fig. 4). Out of our sample of 603 households, 113 (18.7%) reported at least one fuel-switch during the previous 5 years, with a number undergoing two or more such switches over the same period (Table 4). The two most common fuel-switches were from fuelwood to kerosene (34.5% of the total) and kerosene to LPG (15% of the total), a finding which tends to support the notion that fuel-switching proceeds from traditional to modern fuels, and that kerosene serves as a transition fuel between woodfuels and the more preferred modern fuels, LPG and electricity. Of those households switching out of fuelwood, the most important reasons given relate to the incon-

Fig. 3. Primary cooking

fuels in the residential

sector of Cebu City (in percent),

1960-19908~47-49

Residential

energy use patterns

Fig. 4. Primary cooking fuels in the residential sector of Cehu City (in number of households),

1960-1990.x~-J~

Table 4. Frequency

of fuel-switching among a sample of 603 households between 1987 and 1992.

in Cebu City

Type of Fuel-Switch

<2,000 (n=82)

Monthly Income Range (P) 2-4,999 5-9,999 lo-19,999 220,000 (~235) (n=165) (n=83) (n=38)

Overall (n=603)

FW-Char. FW-Kero. FW-LPG Char.-Kero. Char.-LPG Kero.-FW Kero.-Char. Kero.-LPG LPG-FW LPG-Kero. Others
Total

7 2 2 1 1 1
14

22 7 2 2 14 3 10 5 5
70

2 9 4 2 1 4 1 7 2 1 2
35

1 4 1 1 3 2 2 14

1 1

2 39 11 4 7 21 7 21 5 9 8
134

venience involved in using this fuel, the higher cost of fuelwood relative to kerosene or LPG, and the lack of space needed to store fuelwood supplies. Households switching out of kerosene moved in two different directions. Around half changed to LPG, usually as a result of improvements in the household financial situation or the receipt of an LPG stove as a gift. The remainder switched to fuelwood or charcoal, primarily because of a defective kerosene stove. Once a household starts using LPG they are less likely to switch back out of it again compared with kerosene. There were, however, a number who switched from LPG to kerosene, fuelwood or charcoal. These resulted either from a perception of kerosene as a less expensive fuel, problems with an LPG stove, or fear of continued use of LPG due to news reports of cylinder explosions and fires associated with the use of this fuel.

ELECTRICITY

CONSUMPTION

Residential sector electricity consumption for Cebu City in 1992 is estimated at 127,200 megawatthours (MWh), or 458 TJ. Overall, 93% of the households in the city are electrified, with the rest either unable to afford the installation charge or unable to obtain a connection due to their living in temporary structures in squatter settlements. Only 1% of Cebu s households use electricity as their primary cooking fuel (Table I), although 10% make use of electric cooking devices on an occasional basis (Table 2). Rice cookers are the most widely-used electric cooking device, owned by 13.4% of households and utilized an average of I .7 times a day. Electric stoves or burners are owned by 7% of households. The relative convenience of

182
16

Terrence G. Bensel and Elizabeth M. Remedio

-t
<2,ooo z-4.999 59,999 lo-19,999 z20,ocO overall Monthly income range, in Pesos(P25 = $1) Fluorescent Incandescent

Fig. 5. Average number of lights in use per household in Cebu City, by income category and bulb type, 1992.

cooking with electricity is offset by frequent power interruptions and high average residential power rates in the region.? On average, households use between five and six electric lights, and fluorescent bulbs outnumber incandescent nearly two-to-one (Fig. 5). Even low-income households are more likely to use fluorescent lights despite relatively high first-time costs for bulbs and fixtures. As household income increases, so does the number of lights in use and the percentage of fluorescent lights in the total. The most widely-owned electric appliances are fans, radios, irons, refrigerators, color and black-andwhite televisions (Table 5). With the exception of black-and-white televisions, ownership of these devices increases steadily with income. The greatest increase in appliance saturation rates- and perhaps the most important from an energy planning perspective-occur between households in the middle-

Table 5. Electric appliance ownership in the residential sector of Cebu City, in percent of electrified households owning at least one of each device, 1992.

lType of Appliance Fan Radio Iron Refrigerator Color TV

B/W TV Video Player Stereo Karaoke Machine Rice Cooker Stove/Burner Sewing Machine Washing Machine Air Conditioner Vacuum Freezer Water Heater

c2,00(1

MontNv Income Range (PI A

LO-19,999 220,000

28.6
47.6 19.0 6.3 15.9 34.9 1.6 9.5 3.2 1.6 1.6 0.0 0.0

60.2

92.8
58.4 57.1 59.0 57.8 42.9 29.2 28.0 24.2 11.8 2.5 4.3 4.3 1.9 0.6 2.5 0.6
67.5 81.9 84.3 78.3 34.9 57.8 38.6 42.2 31.3 10.8 15.7 14.5 14.5 9.6 3.6 6.0

1oo.o
76.3 86.8 92.1 86.8 36.8 81.6 57.9 63.2 60.5 42.1 23.7 34.2 28.9 21.1 13.2 13.2

1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0

62.0 40.3 31.5 29.6 48.1 10.2 18.1 17.6 2.8 4.2 4.6 1.9 1.4 1.4 0.9 0.0

Overall 69.3 61.1 52.0 48.5 47.2 42.4 26.6 25.7 24.6 13.4 7.0 7.0 6.4 5.3 3.6 2.9 2.5

tln 1992, the Visayan Electric Company (VECO), which services most of Cebu City. charged its residential customers a generation charge of around P230/kWh, plus a distribution charge of PO.66/kWh for the tirst 30 kWh consumed and P0,69/kWh for consumption beyond that.

Residential

energy use patterns

183

income and upper-middle income categories (Fig. 6). As household income approaches and exceeds Pl O,OOO/month, ownership and use of electricity-intensive devices like refrigerators, color televisions, washing machines and air conditioners increase dramatically. For washing machines and air conditioners, there is another sharp increase in ownership between upper-middle and high-income households (Fig. 6). Based on frequency of ownership and electricity requirements, refrigerators are probably the largest consumer of residential sector electricity, followed by lighting. The percentage of households in Cebu City owning air conditioners in 1992 (5.3%) is substantially higher than the 1989 national average of less than 1%.I Although owned by only 5% of households in the city, air conditioners could be responsible for as much as 15-20% of residential electricity demand in Cebu due to their high energy requirements and the relatively low efficiency of domestically-produced units. Electricity use for residential air conditioning in the Philippines is projected to increase over 10% per annum throughout the 199Os, compared with overall growth in residential electricity demand of less than 5% per annum. Given their high energy requirements, the low efficiency of most units currently on the market, and projected increases in their ownership and use, air conditioners offer an attractive target for programs aimed at promoting increased penetration of more efficient units into the market. Expenditures on electricity as a percentage of income vary much less between households of different income categories than was the case for cooking fuels. Households with incomes below P50001month spent an average of 5.1% of their total income on electricity, compared with 4.1% for households with monthly incomes greater than P10,OOO. Residential sector electricity use in Cebu City appears far from saturation, and future improvements in living standards will certainly entail more widespread ownership of electricity-intensive devices (see Fig. 6). Power sector planning in the region should account for this, and where feasible consideration should be given to the prospect of offsetting increased appliance ownership with programs to improve end-use efficiency.
OVERALL LEVELS OF RESIDENTIAL ENERGY DEMAND

Residential sector energy consumption in Cebu City (102,446 households) in 1992 is estimated at 2077 TJ on a delivered energy basis, or approximately 3779 MJ of energy per capita per year. On average, households require 1646 MJ of energy per month, although this figure varies from 1420 MJ for low-income households up to 2558 MJ in the high-income group (Fig. 7) As a result of the relatively low efficiencies with which fuelwood is converted from delivered into useful energy, fuelwood makes the largest contribution (43.8%) to meeting overall delivered residential energy requirements (Fig. 7). In addition, delivered energy consumption levels are roughly equal in low- and middle-income households due to high levels of fuelwood use in the former. When residential energy consumption is adjusted to reflect assumed end-use efficiencies,? the importance of fuelwood
100 90 80 M 70 ,f 6tJ 2 o 50 U j 40 30 20 10 0 <2,oOu Z-4999 19,999 1049,999 no,000 overall Monthly income range, in Pesos (F25 = $1)

Fig. 6. Appliance

saturation

rates in the residential

sector of Cebu City for six electric

devices,

1992.

fDelivered energy converted to useful energy assuming efticiencies of 15% for fuelwood. 20% for charcoal, 407~ for kerosene and 55% for LPG (see Ref. 19). Conversion efficiencies for electric cooking devices are reported to range from 50 to 90% EGY 20-3-8

184

Terrence G. Bensel and Elizabeth M. Remedio

2500
2000

%=@J
loo0 so0
0 <z,ca 2-4,999'5-9,999 i0_19,99daom0'Ove1d

Monthlyincome range, in Pesos (pu = $1)

Fig. 7. Average monthly household consumption of major energy forms on a delivered energy basis, in megajoules (MJ) per household, Cebu City, 1992. Reported household energy consumption was converted into MJ as follows: 1 kg wood = 16 MJ; 1 kg charcoal = 30 MJ; 1 liter kerosene = 34.1 MJ; 1 kg LPG =45.2 MJ; 1 kilowatt-hour electricity = 3.6 MJ (see Ref. 19).

declines considerably, and overall energy use increases steadily with income (Fig. 8). On a useful energy basis, electricity accounts for 50.5% of overall residential energy consumption, LPG 17.4%, fuelwood 16%, kerosene 10.3%, and charcoal 5.8% (Fig. 8). Although useful cooking energy requirements might be expected to level off or saturate at higher income levels, the combined consumption of fuelwood, charcoal, kerosene and LPG doubles between the lowest and highest-income category (Fig. 8). This could be caused by a number of factors. First, as discussed above, lower-income households tend to cook less and rely more on purchases of prepared foods from vendors, thereby reducing their cooking energy requirements. Second, higher income households also tend to have more members, with average household size increasing from 4.7 members in the lowest income category to 5.4, 5.8, 6.8, and 7.6 in the next four income categories, respectively.? Figure 7 illustrates clearly that fuelwood is viewed as an inferior good across all income categories, declining steadily in use as income increases. In contrast, charcoal behaves as a normal good, with average household consumption increasing more than four-fold across the income spectrum. Kerosene

1800 1fJOO 1400

1200

E loo0
800

600 400 200 0

Fig. 8. Average monthly household consumption of major energy forms on a useful energy basis, in megajoules (MJ) per household, Cebu City, 1992. Delivered energy consumption was converted into useful energy assuming 15% efficiency for fuelwood, 20% for charcoal, 40% for kerosene and 55% for LPG. No distinction was made between delivered and useful electricity consumption (see footnote). (see Ref. 50). However, since only a tiny fraction of residential electricity use in Cebu goes towards cooking, and since no convention exists for converting appliance or lighting electricity use from a delivered to useful basis, useful electricity consumption is assumed to be 100% of delivered electricity consumption. tSome of this increase can be attributed to the presence of household help in higher-income households.

Residential

energy use patterns

185

acts as a normal good from the lowest to the middle income category, and then as an inferior good beyond that. LPG is clearly a normal good across all income categories, as is electricity which shows the most rapid increase in use as incomes rise. On average, households in Cebu City spend 8% of their monthly income on energy purchases (Fig. 9). This figure is 13% for the low-income group, with one-fourth of the households in this category spending over 18%, and one-tenth over 25% of their monthly income on energy purchases (Fig. 9). High-income households spend an average of only 4% of their income on energy despite the fact that they consume nearly twice as much energy overall, and 16 times as much electricity, as households in the low-income group (Figs. 8 and 9).

CONCLUSIONS

AND

POLICY

RECOMMENDATIONS

In the years ahead, residential sector energy consumption in Cebu City could undergo substantial change in both qualitative and quantitative terms. A cooking fuel transition from traditional biomass fuels to kerosene and LPG has reduced the percentage of households using the former from over 90% in 1960 to 40% by 1990 (see Fig. 3). However, this transition has not proceeded as far or as fast as that experienced in other Asian cities,34,.4 and absolute levels of woodfuel consumption in Cebu City are as high today as they were 30 years ago. Continued high rates of urban population growth combined with persistent inequalities in income distribution could keep residential fuelwood demand at current levels or higher for some time to come. The popularity of charcoal among even high-income consumers suggests that demand for this fuel will also remain high. Energy and environmental planners in Cebu should work on the assumption that woodfuel demand will remain strong, and then redesign current regulations and policies in order to encourage greater woodfuel production on private lands. Our own research refutes the widely-held perception that urban woodfuel demand is a primary cause of deforestation on the is1and.t Instead, we ve found that urban woodfuel markets are one of the major reasons for the relative success and widespread adoption of private reforestation and agroforestry practices in rural areas of the province, and that the great bulk of woodfuel production is occurring on a sustainable basis.* ,* Potential exists for improving the end-use efficiencies of fuelwood and charcoal stoves in urban households, and for increasing conversion efficiencies of charcoal-making in rural areas. At present, 45% of the fuelwood stoves and 2 1% of the charcoal stoves in use in Cebu are home-made, ranging from crude three-stone arrangements to fairly elaborate designs fashioned from scrap metal and tin. A program to train and finance local artisans in the design and production of fuel-efficient and inexpensive fuelwood and charcoal cookstoves could result in energy savings, reduced household fuel expenditures, and reductions in indoor and local air pollution. Subsidizing kerosene and/or LPG in order to lessen the environmental impact associated with woodfuel harvest should not be viewed as a serious policy option for reasons just mentioned. Subsidizing these fuels to enable low-income households to use them is also not recommended since other factors

25 20 E g157 a 10 5 0:

-3

I
.

j
I I 1 I

<2,000

Z-4,999

5-9399

lo-19,999

>20,000

Monthly income range, in Pesos (P25 = $1) Fig. 9. Percentage of monthly household income spent on energy purchases, Cebu City, 1992.

i-Over 90% of Cebu s original forest cover was removed before 1900 for timber and as a result of agricultural expansion. Since then, most fuelwood production has come from intensively-managed woodlots, agroforestry systems, coconut plantations and tree/shrub fallow areas (see Refs. 20 and 21 ).

186

Terrence G. Bensel and Elizabeth M. Remedio

besides fuel price, such as stove costs, taste preferences and issues of safety, are more important

in

preventing their wider use. If speeding-up the fuel-switching transition from biomass to kerosene or LPG is deemed desirable for reasons of equity or for reducing indoor air pollution, then emphasis should be placed on easing the burden of equipment costs, perhaps through stove dissemination programs, as well as on educating residents on the safe use of these fuels. Even in the absence of direct government intervention, current trends in urbanization and income growth in Cebu favors more widespread use of kerosene and LPG as household cooking fuels. Electricity accounts for 20.7% of delivered energy and 50.5% of useful energy consumption in the residential sector of Cebu City. Electricity is used primarily for lighting and a few major appliances, notably refrigerators, color televisions, washing machines, air conditioners, and electric fans. Residential sector electricity demand in Cebu is growing faster than the national average, and is still quite far from reaching a saturation point. Electric power shortages have been a hindrance to economic expansion in the province, prompting the Philippine government to undertake projects to interconnect Cebu s electric power grid with geothermal power plants on the islands of Leyte and Negros. While these will improve power supply, demandside efficiency improvements in residential electricity use should also be looked into as a serious option for ensuring adequate availability of power in the future.
Acknowledgements-This research was supported in part by the Philippine Department of Energy - Non Conventional Resources Division, the FAO - Regional Wood Energy Development Programme in Asia, and the Winrock International ForestrylFuelwood Research and Development Project. The lead author was supported by a Fulbright Research Fellowship and by a NASA Training Grant in Earth Systems Science. We wish to thank Robert Harriss, Mike Maniates and an anonymous referee for helpful comments and suggestions. REFERENCES

1. N. Keyfitz and W. Flieger, World Population Growth and Aging: Demographic Trends in the Late Twentieth Century, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL (1990). 2. P. K. Ghosh, Urban Development in the Third World, Greenwood Press, London (1984). 3. D. W. Jones, Energy J. 10, 29 (1989). 4. J. Leitman, Energy-Environment Linkages in the Urban Sector, Urban Management Program Discussion Paper Series No. 2, UNDP/World Bank, Washington, DC (April 1991). 5. J. Sathaye, S. Tyler, and N. Goldman, Energy-The International Journal 19, 573 ( 1994). 6. S. Tyler, Energy-The International Journal 19, 503 (1994). 7. National Statistics Office, 1990 Census of Population and Housing: Population by City, Municipality, and Barangay-Cebu, NSO Report No. 2-28G, Manila (1990). 8. National Statistics Office, 1990 Census of Population and Housing: Socio-Economic and Demographic Characteristics - Cebu, NSO Report No. 3-296, Manila (1992). 9. National Statistical Coordination Board, 1993 Philippine Statistical Yearbook, NSCB, Manila (1993). 10. R. Tiglao, Far Eastern Economic Review (28 November 1991). 11. Regional Development Council, Highlights of the Central Visayas Regional Development Plan: 1993- 1998, RDC-Region VII, Cebu City (1993). 12. I. R. Sino-Cruz, Philippine Daily Inquirer ( 12 April 1992). 13. P. R. Churchill, Phil. Quarterly of Culture & Society 21, 3 (1993). 14. S. A. Gultiano, Phil. Quarterly of Culture & Society 20, 49 (1992). 15. Office of Technology Assessment, Fueling Development: Energy Technologies for Developing Countries, US Congress, OTA Report No. OTA-E-516, Washington, DC (1992). 16. S. Meyers, S. Tyler, H. Geller, J. Sathaye, and L. Schipper, Energy Efficiency and Household Electric Appliances in Developing and Newly Industrialized Countries, Report No. LBL-29678, International Energy Studies Group, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, California (1990). 17. L. Schipper and S. Meyers, Energy Policy 19, 578 (1991). 18. National Power Corporation, 1991 Power Development Program ( 1991-2005), NPC, Manila ( 1991). 19. UNDPIESMAP, Philippines: Defining an Energy Strategy for the Household Sector, Joint UNDPlWorld Bank Energy Sector Management Assistance Programme, Washington, DC (1992). 20. T. G. Bensel and E. M. Remedio, Patterns of Commercial Woodfuel Supply, Distribution and Use in the City and Province of Cebu, Philippines, Field Document No. 42, FAO-Regional Wood Energy Development Programme in Asia, Bangkok (1993). 21. T. G. Bensel, Biomass Fuel Supply and Utilization in the Cities of the Developing World: A Case Study of Cebu City, Philippines, Ph.D. dissertation, University of New Hampshire, Durham ( 1994). 22. B. P. Bhatt, A. K. Negi, and N. P. Todaria, Energy-The International Journal 19, 465 (1994). 23. M. J. Alam, J. Dunkerley, and A. K. Reddy, Natural Resources Forum 9, 205 (1985). 24. V. B. Amatya, M. Chandrashekar, and J. B. Robinson, Energy-The International Journal 18, 341 ( 1993). 25. R. A, Cline-Cole, J. A. Falola, H. A. C. Main, M. J. Mortimore, J. E. Nichol, and F. D. O Reilly, Wood Fuel in Kano, United Nations University Press, Tokyo ( 1990).

Residential energy use patterns

187

26. E. L. Hyman, Energy Policy 13, 58 1 ( I985 ). 27. L. C. A. de S. Wijesinghe, Biomass 5, 261 ( 1984). 28. G. Foley, Ambio 14, 253 ( 1985). 29. R. A. Cline-Cole, H. A. C. Main, and J. E. Nichol. World Devel. 18, 5 13 ( 1990). 30. A. Ouerghi, in Wood Energy Development: Planning, Policies and Strategies II, pp. 6 I-84, FAO-Regional Wood Energy Development Programme in Asia, Bangkok ( 1993). 31. I. Tinker and M. Cohen, [FDA Dossier 49, 13 ( 1985). 32. J. Sathaye and S. Tyler, Ann. Rev. Energy Environ. 16, 295 ( 1991). 33. G. Leach and R. Mearns, Beyond the Woodfuel Crisis: People. Land and Trees in Africa, Earthscan, London ( 1988). international Journal 19, 509 ( 1994). 34. A. Pongsapich and W. Wongsekiarttirat, Energy-The 35. P. Hills, Energy-The International Journal 19, 5 17 ( 1994). 36. Q. Daxiong, M. Yuqing, L. Yingyun, W. Qizhi, and Z. Zhuliang, Energy-The International Journal 19,
529 ( 1994). 37. T. G. Bensei,

38. 39. 40.

41.

42.

43.
44. 45.

46. 47. 48. 49. 50.

in Wood Energy Development: Planning, Policies and Strategies II, pp. 1099148, FAORegional Wood Energy Development Programme in Asia, Bangkok (1993). M. Bess, Kenya Charcoal Survey: Final Report and Annexes, Ministry of Planning and National Development, Nairobi ( 1989). J. Sathaye and S. Meyers, Ann. Rev. Energy 10, 109 (1985). G. A. Leach, Ann. Rev. Energy 13. 47 (1988). J. Soussan, P. O Keefe, and B. Munslow, Energy Policy 18, 572 ( 1990). D. F. Barnes and L. Qian, Urban Interfuel Substitution, Energy Use, and Equity in Developing Countries: Some Preliminary Results, Industry and Energy Department Working Paper, Energy Series Paper No. 53, The World Bank, Washington, DC (March 1992). R. A. Garcia, F. Manegdeg, and N. 0. Raneses, Energy-The International Journal 19, 539 (1994). G. G. Stevenson, J. Devel. Areas 24, 59 (1989). R. H. Hosier and M. A. Bernstein, Energy J. 13, 129 (1992). B. Munslow, Y. Katerere, A. Ferf, and P. O Keefe, The Fuelwood Trap: A Study of the SADCC Region, Earthscan, London (1988). H. E. Jacobson, Tradition and Change in Cebu: A Study in a Philippine Provincial City, Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University ( 1969). Bureau of the Census and Statistics, Final Report, Volume 1, Cebu, 1970 Census of Population and Housing, BCS. Manila (1972). National Census and Statistics Office, Final Report, Volume 1, Cebu, 1980 Census of Population and Housing, NCSO, Manila ( 1983). G. Leach and M. Gowen, Household Energy Handbook: An Interim Guide and Reference Manual, World Bank Technical Paper No. 67, Washington, DC (1987).