See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/314096297

User-driven design of low-cost, low environmental impact solar ovens for rural
populations in developing countries.

Article  in  Journal of Engineering for Sustainable Community Development · January 2006

DOI: 10.3992/2166-2517-1.1.1

CITATIONS READS

2 25,699

5 authors, including:

Brian K. Thorn Andres Leonardo Carrano

Rochester Institute of Technology Fairfield University
37 PUBLICATIONS   532 CITATIONS    72 PUBLICATIONS   1,258 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

3D-Printed Biosurfaces View project

Metrology View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Andres Leonardo Carrano on 28 February 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

JESD_01thorn.qxd 4/17/06 4:38 PM Page 1

USER-DRIVEN DESIGN FRAMEWORK OF LOW-COST, LOW

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SOLAR OVENS FOR RURAL
POPULATIONS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
Brian K. Thorn,1 Andres L. Carrano,2 Carlos R. Plaz,3
Christopher R. Wood,4 Elizabeth Guedez5

ABSTRACT
For nations with large populations below the poverty line, especially those with significant rural populations, solar ovens
might represent an affordable and, perhaps the only, feasible means of cooking, pasteurizing water, and drying food for
preservation. Although solar ovens have been around for more than 50 years, their propagation and adoption has been
very limited. Hindering widespread adoption, perhaps, is the lack of awareness in the communities as well as the lack
of low-cost, regionally appropriate ovens that incorporate end user feedback into the design process. The objective of this
work is to propose and illustrate a methodology to design and develop a regionally appropriate solar oven (with local
materials, labor and user input) that can be mass-produced with low environmental impact. Following a phase/gate
methodology, a student team gathered information from a rural community in Venezuela, and iterated/tested several
designs until achieving the desired compromise between cost, performance, and environmental impact. This paper de-
scribes the entire design process, the resultant oven design, as well as the overall experience. A section on Life Cycle
Assessment discusses the environmental implications of the processes involved in fabricating these ovens as well as of the
end-of-life practices and disposal. This project was recipient of a first prize P3 (People, Planet and Prosperity) award by
the Environmental Protection Agency.

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Problems Associated with Water Quality

Food cooking and water pasteurization are essential ac-
tivities for proper human digestion of nutrients and in-
activation of harmful bacteria and parasites, as well as
general human health. However, in the average Latin
American country, 45% of the population is below the
poverty line and approximately 36% of the population
lives in rural settings [5], where power, running water
and sewage systems may not be available. These statis-
tics are even more severe in other parts of the world,
such as sub-Saharan Africa. For these demographics,
the basic requirements of safe drinking water and prop-
erly cooked meals are not satisfied on a regular basis.
The need for safe water and the consequences of rou-
tinely cooking with fire are detailed in this section.
In developing countries, the burden of disease caused
by contaminated water is staggering, particularly
among young children. According to the United Na-
tion Children’s Fund [21], diarrhea is the most com-
mon childhood disease in developing countries, and
dehydration from diarrhea the leading cause of death
in children under the age of five. This disease is re-
sponsible for the deaths of 5 million children every
year. In its latest report, Unicef [21] estimates the
magnitude of the water deprivation threat: about
400 million children (one in every five children) have
no access to safe water. To a different degree, the dis-
eases and problems resulting from unsafe water also
impact impoverished adults living in rural areas.

1. Associate Professor, Industrial and Systems Engineering. Rochester Institute of Technology. Rochester, USA
2. Assistant Professor, Industrial and Systems Engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology. 81 Lomb Memorial Drive. Rochester, New
York 14623-5603. Phone (585) 475-6062. Fax (585) 475-2520. Email: alceie@rit.edu (corresponding author)
3. Graduate Research Assistant, Industrial and Systems Engineering. Rochester Institute of Technology. Rochester, USA
4. Graduate Research Assistant, Industrial and Systems Engineering. Rochester Institute of Technology. Rochester, USA
5. Centro de Atencion al Nino NGO (CAINA), Caracas, Venezuela.

Volume 1, Number 1 1
JESD_01thorn.qxd 4/17/06 4:38 PM Page 2
1.2 Problems Associated with Firewood Stoves
For populations below the poverty line and/or in rural
areas, the traditional fuel for cooking and water pas-
teurization is wood, a resource whose supply is dwin-
dling. About 2 billion of the Earth’s 6 billion inhabi-
tants currently cook using wood for fuel [11].
Additionally, about 1 billion people are not able to se-
cure any kind of fuel for cooking on a regular basis [8].
The practice of gathering and burning wood for
cooking takes an enormous human and environmen-
tal toll each year. Deforestation of carbon sequester-
ing trees is greatly influenced by this practice. Accord-
ing to the FAO [8], the change in the world’s forest
cover in the 1990–2000 decade was –0.2% (or a de-
crease of 9,391,000 ha.), with worldwide fuelwood
consumption totaling 1,795,496 m3. This also accen-
tuates problems due to soil erosion, loss of habitat,
and contamination of waterways. Biomass fueled fires
also pollute the air and contribute to global warming.
Further, the rapid depletion of fuelwood forces people
(primarily women and children) to spend many hours
each day in an increasingly unproductive foraging
process. It is reported that the average person living in
a rural area in a developing country walks between 3
to 10 miles to gather enough wood to cook for a day,
while Afghan refugees have been reported to spend
approximately 99 man-hours/month collecting wood
for cooking [11]. This situation is likely to worsen as
forests are further depleted.
The negative environmental and economic conse-
quences of firewood cooking are matched by the ad-
verse health impacts (primarily respiratory ailments
and eye diseases) associated with long-term exposure to
smoke. Firewood stoves are major sources of concen-
trated indoor air pollution from smoke. In homes
without ventilation, exposure to particulate matter, car-
bon monoxide, formaldehyde, benzene, nitrogen diox-
ide, and other gases can reach 1000 µg/m3 over a 24-
hour period [15], more than 20 times higher than the
standards set by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency [22]. Indoor air pollution is the fourth leading
cause of premature death in the developing world and,
overall, kills over 1.6 million people, predominantly
women and children, every year [22]. This represents a
death toll almost as great as that caused by unsafe water
and sanitation, and greater than that caused by malaria.
Use of fuelwood for cooking presents a challenge
to the environment and human health, but contin-
2 Journal of Engineering for Sustainable Development
ues to be the most practical solution to the energy
needs of poor rural sectors. For individuals below the
poverty line, especially those in rural locations, solar
ovens might represent an affordable and, perhaps the
only, feasible means of cooking, pasteurizing water,
and drying food for preservation. Wider use of solar
cooking in place of fuelwood cooking will reduce
fuel consumption [11], reduce emissions of green-
house gases and other pollutants [2], and aid in ef-
forts to combat disease and ensure environmental
sustainability.
Although solar ovens have been around for more
than 50 years, their propagation and adoption has
been very limited. Nandwani [11] states that the
total number of solar ovens is approximately
525,000 worldwide. A significant percentage of these
are not being utilized by people below the poverty
line, but rather by environmentally conscious people
who use them sporadically (picnics, camping, etc).
With respect to feasibility, locations between the
tropics of Capricorn and Cancer (23°30' south and
north of Equator line) are ideal and receive over 300
days of sunshine per year. These locations include
Brazil, Indonesia, the Philippines, and most sub-
Saharan African nations, among others. Evidently,
widespread use of solar ovens has not taken place be-
cause awareness of their existence, benefits and appli-
cations have been very limited while dissemination
and education to the target populations has proven
difficult. The premise of this work is that the lack of
a low-price, regionally appropriate (i.e using local
materials, labor, and user input, etc.) design further
hinders widespread adoption.
Archival literature in the oven design area has fo-
cused on the basic understanding of these devices,
improvement of the oven design, and/or unit cost re-
duction [1, 3–4, 9–13, 17–20]. Most designs are de-
veloped with low cost considerations, but no attempt
is made to design ovens with minimal environmental
impact or mass production considerations. Another
factor that has not been well addressed is how to in-
corporate the voice of the customer in the design
phase of solar ovens in a systematic way. It is impor-
tant for widespread adoption that the solar oven ad-
heres as much as it can to the expectations of the end
user. Finally, the potential environmental impact and
life cycle assessment derived from industrial-scale op-
erations have not been studied. If solar ovens are to
JESD_01thorn.qxd 4/17/06 4:38 PM Page 3
be manufactured in large quantities and widely dis-
Q: check seminated, then the environmental impact of the
for sense. fabrication processes, distribution, as well as the im-
pacts associated with end-of-life practices (i.e. land-
fill, reuse, etc) of must be studied.
The objective of this effort is to develop a system-
atic process for designing multifunctional, low-cost,
regionally appropriate solar ovens that can be mass
produced with reduced environmental impact and
distributed to low-income populations.
2. METHODOLOGY
This case study was conducted under the multidisci-
plinary design program and with the help of a team of
students from the Kate Gleason College of Engineer-
ing at the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT)
and funded by the Environmental Protection Agency.
A phase/gate methodology that includes Quality
Function Deployment (QFD) and Life Cycle Assess-
ment (LCA) is described along with a case study in
rural locations in Venezuela and the experiences of
the student team involved in the project. Figure 1
shows a schematic of the proposed design framework
and depicts the input from the user needs (via QFD),
environmental implications (via LCA) and mass pro-
duction considerations (via DFM/DFA) into an itera-
tive design/redesign process.
The case study was conducted over a period of
one year and included the following stages or phases,
each of them with go/no-go gate:
TABLE 1. Stages of the design process
1) Preliminary assessment trip (Venezuela)
2) Recognition and quantification of customer needs
3) Concept development, preliminary designs and
prototype fabrication (Generation I)
4) Engineering analyses and models
5) Redesign iteration, field testing and on-site
manufacturing (Generation II-A)
6) Redesign iteration (Generation II-B) and testing
7) Final detailed design (Generation III)
2.1 Preliminary Assessment Trip (Venezuela)
In order to develop a relationship with the users and
perform field tests, a developing country had to be
chosen as a study case. Venezuela was selected be-
Volume 1, Number 1
FIGURE 1. QFD-DFM-LCA design framework
cause over 80% of its population lives in poverty [23]
and because the design team already had contacts
with local manufacturers, universities, and with some
institutions (such as local churches and NGOs) em-
bedded in poor neighborhoods. A preliminary trip
was made early in the project to capture the needs
(voice of the customer), define the scope of the proj-
ect, as well as to initiate contact with local manufac-
turers and materials suppliers.
During this preliminary trip, a rural neighbor-
hood in Tazón (an area located 50 miles SW of Cara-
cas) was assessed. With the help of a local NGO, an
appropriate subset of families were identified and in-
terviewed, and specific information on diet, local
food preparation and cooking methods, and respira-
tory problems was gathered. Figures 2a and 2b show
typical stoves used in this community.
The local church staff also provided useful informa-
tion on potential cultural barriers, typical family profile
(size, etc) and the eating habits of this particular popu-
lation. This organization, embedded into the neighbor-
hood and trusted by locals, was identified as an ideal
instrument for deployment and user education for the
future distribution of solar ovens into the communi-
ties. A local wood furniture manufacturer was con-
tacted and visited for future construction of solar ovens
and to explore the local materials, wages, production
capacity, and overall manufacturing practices.
2.2 Recognition and Quantification
of Customer Needs
Based on the information gathered from the prelimi-
nary trip, benchmarking of commercially available
products, and review of literature in the area, a Qual-
3
JESD_01thorn.qxd 4/17/06 4:38 PM Page 4
FIGURE 2A AND 2B. Outdoor (left) and indoor (right) firewood stoves
ity Function Deployment (QFD) / House of Quality
matrix was developed (Figure 3). This information
was utilized to help guide the concept development
process while paying close attention to the end user
needs and design attributes. This approach typically
requires a sequential process that begins by identify-
ing the customer, in this case, people in rural areas of
Venezuela. Informal customer interviews and site as-
sessments are performed in order to identify cus-
tomer needs (i.e. “quickly reaches cooking tempera-
tures”). Once the customer needs are established, a
relative importance is placed to prioritize them and a
set of measurable engineering metrics (which repre-
sent product features/functionalities) is developed.
For example, a larger collector plate area (metal plate
under pot) featured in the oven will likely help reach
cooking temperatures in less time. Then, a non-
linear scaling method (1-3-9) is typically used both
to weigh the customer needs and the strength of in-
teractions between customer needs and the product
features. This scale is used to magnify the differences
in both customer priorities and interactions. Addi-
tionally, the “roof of the house” shows the direction-
ality of the correlation among the product features
and functionalities, and portrays it with a qualitative
+/– scale. In the previous example, a design with a
larger collector plate is desirable because it addresses
a customer need (“quickly reaches cooking tempera-
tures”). However, incorporating this feature will
likely result in a heavier product which is not desired
4 Journal of Engineering for Sustainable Development
by the customer, as expressed in the customer needs
list. Thus, the correlation between collector plate
area and weight of the unit is shown as negative,
which depicts how they impact each other’s direction
of improvement. Finally, the raw scores, relative
weights, and objective target values for the design to
be developed are computed. For comparison, a com-
petitive benchmark of commercially available ovens
with respect to the engineering metrics of interest
completes the matrix. This information was obtained
via product specifications, reverse engineering and
laboratory testing of the commercial units.
In order to obtain benchmark performance data,
three commercially available ovens were purchased
and tested (Figure 4). All were box type ovens with
different capacities, reflector arrangements and either
single or double glass/acrylic pane. The prices of
these ovens ranged from 120 to 220 USD, their
weight ranged from 11 to 26 lbs, and their perform-
ance (peak air temperature—dependent upon ambi-
ent conditions) ranged from 275°F (135°C) to
360°F (182°C), according to the manufacturers’
specifications.
2.3 Concept Development, Preliminary Design
and Prototype Fabrication (Generation I)
After developing the QFD matrix, reviewing avail-
able literature, and examining the existing commer-
cial products, several brainstorming sessions were
performed from which some ten sketch concepts
JESD_01thorn.qxd 4/17/06 4:38 PM Page 5

FIGURE 3. Quality Function Deployment (QFD) / House of Quality Matrix

FIGURE 4. Benchmark of commercial ovens

FIGURE 5. Sample sketches during concept

development

Volume 1, Number 1 5
JESD_01thorn.qxd 4/17/06 4:38 PM Page 6
FIGURE 6. Example of Generation I computer model and prototype: Four reflector double-wall box
were generated (Figure 5) and narrowed down to
three preliminary designs. These designs were then
fabricated in the wood shop at RIT and became
known as the “Generation I” prototypes. Figure 6
depicts one of the 3D computer models along with a
picture of the corresponding prototype. The materi-
als mainly consisted of particleboard, acrylic, and
reused aluminum sheets from lithographic offset
printing plates. Since printing companies tradition-
ally use only one side of the sheet, the reverse side re-
tains its original properties and can be collected,
reused and polished to achieve a reflectivity rating of
86% [6]. These plates are readily available at a very
low cost, sometimes free, in most countries.
2.4 Engineering Analyses and Models
The models and prototypes from Generation I were
subjected to several engineering analyses, some of
which are described in this section. The appropriate-
ness of the geometry with respect to the local solar
incidence was analyzed using a solar modeling soft-
ware package (Square One®). This allowed for ex-
traction of the conditions (i.e. incidence angle from
azimuth, radiation watts/m2, etc.) throughout the
year, and for a specific location (measured at
N10°30' and W66°51') in Venezuela. This informa-
tion was used to define some of the box angles and
reflector inclination ranges of the subsequent design
iterations.
Additionally, an extensive analysis of the construc-
tion material was performed. The physical and me-
chanical properties of many kinds of wood, wood-
6 Journal of Engineering for Sustainable Development
composites, plastic, and metals were contrasted for the
box materials. The Cambridge Engineering Selector®,
a materials software package, was used for this pur-
pose. Several design scenarios, such as single-wall ver-
sus double-wall with varying insulation thickness were
examined from thermodynamic and cost perspectives,
and their respective conduction/convection/radiation
losses quantified. The transmission spectra of glass and
acrylic versus wavelength were also investigated for lid
materials. Insulation options considered were either air
or reused/recycled materials in order to reduce the en-
vironmental impact of the production processes and
materials employed. During the design process, the
traditional considerations of design for manufacturing
and design for assembly were taken into account. Fig-
ure 7 depicts the typical materials analysis constrained
by the cost function of the material.
2.5 Redesign Iteration, Field Testing and
On-site Manufacturing (Generation II-A)
Once preliminary analyses were performed on the
Generation I prototypes, two new designs (Genera-
tion II-A) were developed. In March 2005, two
ovens were fabricated by a local furniture manufac-
turer in Caracas, Venezuela using local materials and
labor. The two ovens were box type and incorporated
double-wall air insulation, unpolished reused alu-
minum reflectors, and acrylic for the lid material.
One design incorporated a single-pane lid while the
other included two panes of acrylic separated by a
15 mm air gap. Preliminary field tests were con-
ducted on the Generation II-A prototypes. The test-
JESD_01thorn.qxd 4/17/06 4:38 PM Page 7
FIGURE 7. Price vs. thermal Conductivity with cutoff at $10/lb (CES® Output)
ing was performed in two distinct locations: Caracas,
at an altitude of approximately 1000 meters and
La Guaira, at sea level.
The purpose of this testing was to show feasibil-
ity and functionality of the ovens fabricated locally.
During the testing, air and water temperature were
monitored over a period of 4 hours (typically be-
tween 11 am–3 pm). Both units reached water pas-
teurization temperatures 145°F (65°C) and cook-
ing temperatures 179°F (82°C). However, the
single-pane acrylic lid version performed less ade-
quately in terms of heat retention, especially in
cloudy conditions.
2.6 Redesign Iteration (Generation II-B)
and Testing
After analyzing the data from the field tests in
Venezuela, one of the ovens from Generation II-A
was retrofitted to correct and improve some design
Volume 1, Number 1
Q: Change to
superscript 2?
features. The acrylic was replaced with clear glass for
increased energy transmission, the insulation be-
tween the double walls was replaced by shredded
reused newspaper, and other minor refinements were
introduced.
The ovens were tested outdoors utilizing the full
solar spectrum for determination of actual perform-
ance. The benchmark ovens along with the prototypes
were placed outside with pots containing equal
amounts of water in their interior. In this test proce-
dure (as well as in the previous one) 20 thermocouples
were placed within each solar oven to monitor their
interior air and water temperatures, as well as heat gain
rates over a period of 4 hours. The thermocouples
were placed on each inner face of the oven, as well as
on the surface, lid, and inside of the pots. A computer
recorded the data for each oven tested. The improved
model outperformed Generation II-A with respect to
almost every metric.
7
JESD_01thorn.qxd 4/17/06 4:38 PM Page 8
2.7 Final Detailed Design (Generation III)
The final design iteration produced the “Generation
III” solar oven (Figure 8). The profile of this design
was changed to make it large enough to contain two
pots therefore providing enough cooking capacity for
a family of 6–8 people. This design addresses this
particular customer need in a better way than previ-
ous prototypes. It also includes double-layered walls
filled with shredded recycled paper. The wall thick-
ness, dimensions, and materials were determined by
further thermal analysis. The material selected for the
box was Medium Density Fiberboard, for its rela-
FIGURE 8. Generation III computer model
FIGURE 9. Internal air temperature vs. time
8 Journal of Engineering for Sustainable Development
tively low thermal conductivity, relative low cost, and
availability. The lid is composed of two 3 mm glass
panes separated by 2 cm air gap for insulation pur-
poses. The heat collector plate and interior/exterior
reflectors were made with reused aluminum from the
offset printing process. The reflectors were polished
to approximate mirror finish. The overall height was
reduced to minimize the shadowing effect of the box
walls, thus increasing the direct incidence of sun-
light. All the materials used have acceptable UV-ray
and environmental resistance, poor flammability,
slow wear, and at least average resistance to fresh and
sea water.
Production data was gathered from a local manu-
facturer in Venezuela. The Generation III oven can
be fabricated for a total cost of $32.68 ($28.84 mate-
rials and $3.84 labor). Although this figure does not
include a profit margin, this is about a fourth of the
price of the cheapest commercially available oven ac-
quired. The thermal performance of the oven during
initial testing conducted in the spring is shown in
Figure 9.
It can be seen in Figure 9, that the Generation III
oven experiences a similar temperature gain rate and
overall performance pattern. As expected, the com-
mercial oven achieved higher temperatures and the
performance gap ranged between 5°–20°C. The tem-
perature gain rate (over 30 minutes) of the Genera-
JESD_01thorn.qxd 4/17/06 4:38 PM Page 9
tion III oven was 1.43°C/min, whereas the commer-
cial oven achieved 1.83°C/min. The Generation III
oven exceeded the target value of 1.0 °C/min as stated
in the QFD matrix. The ambient temperature at the
beginning of the test was 55°F (13°C) and gradually
increased to reach a plateau of 68°F (20°C). Later in
the summer, and under more favorable conditions
(ambient temperature 31°C (88°F) and solar radia-
tion index of 900 W/m2) the same Generation III
oven reached peak air temperatures of 121°C
(250°F). Since the average solar radiation index at the
location in Venezuela is close to 1000W/m2, and the
Q: average temperature ranges between 81–96°F
Changed (27–36°C) cooking temperatures are expected to be
96 to 36. considerably higher. Testing in Venezuela is scheduled
Okay as to take place during the summer of 2006.
set?
3. LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT (LCA)
Life Cycle Assessment is an objective process to eval-
uate the environmental burdens associated with a
product, process, or activity by identifying energy
and materials used and wastes released to the envi-
ronment, and to evaluate and implement opportuni-
ties to affect environmental improvements [14].
A cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment was con-
ducted in order to compare the environmental,
human health, and natural resource impacts associated
with a commercially available solar oven to those of
the Generation III oven. The benchmark oven was
chosen because it presented the closest profile (lowest
FIGURE 10. Lifecycle network for benchmark oven
Volume 1, Number 1
commercial cost, similar performance, simplest de-
sign) to Generation III. This analysis attempted to de-
scribe the impacts associated with raw material extrac-
tion, fabrication, delivery to the user, and end of life
disposal for both the benchmark oven and the Gener-
ation III design. It was assumed that all ovens would
be landfilled at the end of their useful lives. Trans-
portation of raw materials from their extraction point
to the fabrication point was not included in the analy-
sis, but transportation of the finished ovens to the user
was included. SimaPro® version 6.0 was used to per-
form this analysis and the Eco-indicator 99 (H) scor-
ing method was used for comparison. The Eco-
indicator 99 method scores products with respect to
three types of potential damage: damage to human
health, damage to ecosystem quality, and depletion of
resources. In the human health category, the process
captures the potential degradation in human health re-
sulting from environmental causes. The following ef-
fects are included in the human health category: cli-
mate change, ozone layer depletion, release of
carcinogens, release of particulate matter, and nuclear
radiation. The ecosystem quality category assesses ef-
fects on species diversity. Effects considered here are
ecotoxicity, acidification, eutrophication, and land
use. The resource depletion category evaluates the sur-
plus energy that will be needed in the future to extract
minerals and fossil fuels from lower quality sources.
Figures 10 and 11 show the network of major
contributors to the impacts associated with the life
9
JESD_01thorn.qxd 4/17/06 4:38 PM Page 10
FIGURE 11. Lifecycle network for Generation III Solar Oven
cycle of the two solar oven designs. Due to space
constraints only the top three levels of the complete
network hierarchy are shown. This level of detail
shows the relative impacts of each material and the
corresponding process used. The production of plas-
tic for the commercial oven causes the largest impact,
as can be seen in Figure 10 by the thick lines pro-
truding from the plastic production nodes (the oven
is manufactured from a combination of recycled and
virgin materials; the required molding and forming
operations consume large amounts of energy). The
Generation III design does not use plastic in its con-
struction therefore generates fewer negative impacts.
Due to the fact that the Generation III solar oven
was designed to be ecologically benign, the greatest
impact associated with its life cycle occurs during the
transportation phase, as seen in Figure 11. Producing
the ovens locally does, however, minimize the im-
pacts that arise from that transportation.
As mentioned previously, the overall impact score
for each design was calculated using the Eco-
Indicator 99(H) method for environmental impact
assessment. The impact score for the commercial
oven was 1.7 points while the Generation III oven
scored 0.3 points. These scores are to be used for
comparison, with lower scores being preferred over
higher ones. The Generation III design clearly out-
performs the benchmark solar oven with respect to
the Eco-indicator 99 categories. The overall impact
10 Journal of Engineering for Sustainable Development
score can be broken down into three main categories:
human health, ecosystem quality and resources, as
seen in Figure 12. The Generation III design outper-
forms the commercially available oven in the three
categories by 80%, 66%, and 84% respectively.
4. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
This work aimed at developing a design framework
that strongly incorporated user input and life cycle
assessment on solar ovens and use it on a case study
on a rural community in Venezuela. One of the main
conclusions of this work is the realization of existing
trade-offs that surface when producing an environ-
mentally beneficial product, such as solar ovens, that
offsets consumption of resources or production of
pollution during the product’s use phase. In this
sense, the manufacturer, while engaged in producing
an environmentally benign product, may end up
causing a greater negative impact on the environ-
ment due to its selection of design, materials and
processes and in its pursuit of higher adoption rates
by the users. This paper provides an approach for
such scenario with a case study illustration. Unfortu-
nately, the fact remains that very few people know
about solar ovens and even fewer of those who need
one can afford them. For future work, a thorough in-
vestigation of the mechanisms and barriers during
dissemination at a wider scale is proposed. Addition-
ally, optimization of current designs with the triple
JESD_01thorn.qxd 4/17/06 4:38 PM Page 11
FIGURE 12. Comparison of life cycle impacts of benchmark oven vs. Generation III (SimaPro output)
objective of maximizing performance, minimizing
cost and also minimizing the environmental impact
will be pursued.
5. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank Sister Ana Maria
Gonzalez, President of CAINA (Centro de Atencion
al Nino) in Venezuela, for supporting all aspects of
this project. Other contributors include: Shyam
Nandwani (Solar Physics Lab, Universidad Nacional,
Costa Rica), William Pope (Printing Applications
Lab, RIT), Ryne Raffaelle (Physics, RIT), Jacqueline
Mozrall (Industrial and Systems Engineering, RIT),
Paul Stiebitz (Multidisciplinary Engineering Design
Program, RIT), John Wellin (Mechanical Engineer-
ing, RIT), Rodolfo Carrillo (Norvex, Venezuela),
Sandro Baldini (Fragolar Manufacturing, Venezuela),
as well as the following RIT engineering students:
Emma Fulton, Jonathan Steiner, Cory Cress, Otman
ElAllam, Natalya Privorotskaya, and Joshua Bates.
This work was partially funded by a P3 Research
Assistance Agreement #83188901 awarded by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. It has not
been formally reviewed by the EPA. The views ex-
pressed in this document are solely those of the au-
Volume 1, Number 1
thors and the EPA does not endorse any products or
commercial services mentioned in this publication.
6. REFERENCES
1. Amer, E. H. Theoretical and experimental assessment of a dou-
ble exposure solar cooker. Energy Conversion and Management
2003, 44: 2651–2663.
2. Andreae, M. O. and Merlet, P. Emissions of trace gases and
aerosols form biomass burning. Global Biochemical Cycles 2001.
15(4):955–966.
3. Balzar, A., Stumpf, P., Eckhoff, S., Ackermann, H., and Grupp,
M. A solar cooker using vacuum-tube collectors with inte-
grated heat pipes. Solar Energy 1996, 58(1–3): 1–3.
4. Beaumont, G., Eiloart, T., and Robinson, P.; Ultra low cost
solar cookers: design and field trials in Tanzania. Renewable
Energy 1997, 10(4): 635–640.
5. CIA World Factbook. http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/
factbook/. (accessed September 2004).
6. Fairey, P., Harrison, J., and Thornbloom, M. Solar Oven Devel-
opment and Testing. Final Report. FSEC 26-58-876. From:
Florida Solar Energy Center, 2002.
7. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
http://www.fao.org (accessed March 2005).
8. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
State of the World’s Forests 2003. Rome, Italy. 2003.
9. Funk, P. Evaluating the international standard procedures for
testing solar cookers and reporting performance. Solar Energy
2000, 68(1): 1–7.
11
JESD_01thorn.qxd 4/17/06 4:38 PM Page 12
10. Habeebullah, M. B., Khalifa, A. M., and Olwi, I. The oven
receiver: an approach toward the revival of concentrating solar
cookers. Solar Energy 1995, 54(4): 227–237.
11. Nandwani, S. S. Solar cookers—cheap technology with high
ecological benefits; Ecological Economics 1996, 17: 73–81.
12. Nandwani, S. S. Solar Ovens (Spanish). 2nd Edition. Editorial
Fundación UNA, Costa Rica. 2004.
13. Schwarzer, K., and Vieira da Silva, M. E. Solar cooking sys-
tems with or without heat storage for families and institu-
tions. Solar Energy 2003, 75: 35–41.
14. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry [SETAC]
and SETAC Foundation for Environmental Education, Inc.,
Pensacola, Florida. A Technical Framework for Life-Cycle Assess-
ment. 1991. Workshop (18–23 August, 1990).
15. Solar Cookers International. http://www.solarcookers.org.
(accessed November 2004, January and March 2005).
16. Solar Cookers International. Solar Cooker Review. Volume
10. Number 2. November 2004.
12 Journal of Engineering for Sustainable Development
17. Stumpf, P., Balzar, A., Eisenmann, W., Wendt, S., Acker-
mann, H., and Vajen, K. Comparative measurements and
theoretical modeling of single- and double-stage heat pipe
coupled solar cooking systems for high temperatures. Solar
Energy 2001, 71(1): 1–10.
18. Suharta, H., Abdullah, K., and Sayigh, A. The solar oven:
development and field testing of user made designs in
Indonesia. Solar Energy 1998, 64(4-6): 121–132.
19. Suharta, H., and Sayigh, A. M., Abdullah, K., and Mathew,
K. The comparison of three types of Indonesian solar box
cookers. Renewable Energy 2001, 22: 379–387.
20. Telkes, M. Solar cooking ovens. Solar Energy 1959, 3:1–11.
21. UNICEF, The State of the World’s Children. http://www.
unicef.org. (accessed March 2005).
22. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov.
(accessed December 2004).
23. U.S. Department of State–Bureau of Western Hemisphere
Affairs, Background Note: Venezuela. http://www.state.gov/
r/pa/ei/bgn/35766.htm. (accessed February 2005).
 JESD_01thorn.qxd 4/17/06 4:38 PM Page 14

14 Journal of Engineering for Sustainable Development

View publication stats