Just to provide a bit more context on the Toyola business in Ghana, USAID invested around $1 million between 2002-2005 (give or take) to commercialize the Kenya ceramic jiko stove (the kind of stove that Toyola appears to be selling). Shell Foundation built on that foundation to expand the project and add a focus on indoor air pollution. The NGO EnterpriseWorks provided most, if not all, of the technical assistance, which created the brand name Gyapa, did a large quantity of advertising and trained individual artisans (metal workers and ceramists) to create the supply chain.
At some point, E&Co;became involved in the sector as well, by helping Toyola to develop its business.
I am a big believer in the benefits of this technology. But it is interesting to me how project backers often fail to recognize the people or organizations who helped get a particular technology or project to its current point.
E&Co;doesn’t appear to mention the huge investment from USAID and Shell Foundation that launched the Gyapa stove in Ghana and built very high brand awareness, effectively improving Toyola’s chances at success. Before that, Shell Foundatoin seemed to make little or no reference to USAID’s initial funding in their materials.
And before that, USAID never made much of the fact that this technology was inspired by the Thai bucket stove and brought to Kenya in 1981 by Keith Openshaw and improved by Keynan potter Max Kinyanjui.
I’m not trying to be critical. I’ll admit that the history of these technologies is often complex, and I bet the general public is largely bored by it (anyone still reading this?). But to me, it’s just as exciting as the development of the internet, which also had multiple inventors including one US Presidential candidate. 😊
I wonder if this reflects the reality that protection of intellectual property (trademarks and patents) in the developing world can create a dynamic where anything is out there for the taking. When I promoted the KCJ in Chad, no one seemed to care where the stove came from, just that it saved 40% and paid for itself in six weeks. Or is more of a reflection of the perceieved zero-sum game in the non-profit and international development industry?
On a completely different note, I wonder if anyone else finds it interesting that the developed world is looking to the developing world to reduce its already small carbon footprint by using more efficient cookstoves, even to the point that the developed world could seek carbon credits from such projects. I am no expert, but I’m assuming that when I turn on my natural gas or electric range in the US, I am also emitting CO2.
Again, I’m a HUGE believer in energy efficient cookstoves for the developing world, particularly in their ability to save consumers money in the case of charcoal and reducing health problems in the case of wood. So I salute all the above organizations and individuals who have worked hard to get them into the hands of as many people as possible.
These schemes thought up to supposedly save us from pollution by developing alternative sources of energy, really are done with the dollar sign in front of those ‘genius’ eyes. It is another investment, it is another way to follow the money. If there were a REAL interest in helping our Pachamama, these same people, let’s call them investors. would be looking at other sources that work like Vacuum energy, cold fusion, water hydrogen, etc. But, because these can be done for low or no cost, they are not even looked at by the soon to be extinct “marketplace”. Further, the carbon credits are a total ripoff allowing continuing pollution by the corporations while hardly anything gets to the people who take care of the trees. We have to rethink, not restructure what is already failing.
COMMENTS
BY Donna Delorenzo
ON December 11, 2008 02:13 PM
Is there a project that our college students could get involved with?
BY Luke Filose
ON December 11, 2008 10:47 PM
Just to provide a bit more context on the Toyola business in Ghana, USAID invested around $1 million between 2002-2005 (give or take) to commercialize the Kenya ceramic jiko stove (the kind of stove that Toyola appears to be selling). Shell Foundation built on that foundation to expand the project and add a focus on indoor air pollution. The NGO EnterpriseWorks provided most, if not all, of the technical assistance, which created the brand name Gyapa, did a large quantity of advertising and trained individual artisans (metal workers and ceramists) to create the supply chain.
At some point, E&Co;became involved in the sector as well, by helping Toyola to develop its business.
I am a big believer in the benefits of this technology. But it is interesting to me how project backers often fail to recognize the people or organizations who helped get a particular technology or project to its current point.
E&Co;doesn’t appear to mention the huge investment from USAID and Shell Foundation that launched the Gyapa stove in Ghana and built very high brand awareness, effectively improving Toyola’s chances at success. Before that, Shell Foundatoin seemed to make little or no reference to USAID’s initial funding in their materials.
And before that, USAID never made much of the fact that this technology was inspired by the Thai bucket stove and brought to Kenya in 1981 by Keith Openshaw and improved by Keynan potter Max Kinyanjui.
I’m not trying to be critical. I’ll admit that the history of these technologies is often complex, and I bet the general public is largely bored by it (anyone still reading this?). But to me, it’s just as exciting as the development of the internet, which also had multiple inventors including one US Presidential candidate. 😊
I wonder if this reflects the reality that protection of intellectual property (trademarks and patents) in the developing world can create a dynamic where anything is out there for the taking. When I promoted the KCJ in Chad, no one seemed to care where the stove came from, just that it saved 40% and paid for itself in six weeks. Or is more of a reflection of the perceieved zero-sum game in the non-profit and international development industry?
On a completely different note, I wonder if anyone else finds it interesting that the developed world is looking to the developing world to reduce its already small carbon footprint by using more efficient cookstoves, even to the point that the developed world could seek carbon credits from such projects. I am no expert, but I’m assuming that when I turn on my natural gas or electric range in the US, I am also emitting CO2.
Again, I’m a HUGE believer in energy efficient cookstoves for the developing world, particularly in their ability to save consumers money in the case of charcoal and reducing health problems in the case of wood. So I salute all the above organizations and individuals who have worked hard to get them into the hands of as many people as possible.
BY Chuck Gribble
ON December 12, 2008 07:42 AM
Check out the ONIL stove on the helps international website. Very successful track record thus far in Central America.
BY Lucero del Bosque
ON December 13, 2008 05:24 AM
These schemes thought up to supposedly save us from pollution by developing alternative sources of energy, really are done with the dollar sign in front of those ‘genius’ eyes. It is another investment, it is another way to follow the money. If there were a REAL interest in helping our Pachamama, these same people, let’s call them investors. would be looking at other sources that work like Vacuum energy, cold fusion, water hydrogen, etc. But, because these can be done for low or no cost, they are not even looked at by the soon to be extinct “marketplace”. Further, the carbon credits are a total ripoff allowing continuing pollution by the corporations while hardly anything gets to the people who take care of the trees. We have to rethink, not restructure what is already failing.
BY Santiago Perez
ON October 15, 2012 12:20 PM
Check out the story of E+Co’s sad demize, and the promising potential of the B Corporation that is rising from its ashes.
http://impactiq.org/eco-avoids-liquidation-barely-and-emerges-persistent/#comments