Integrated Solar Cooking:
An Underutilized Solution
Paul Arveson
Forty years ago, Francis Schae er challenged Christians to set an example of care
for the environment. Now, as the earth has a population of more than seven billion,
how well have we responded to this challenge? What have we done about global
stewardship? This article describes a low-cost technology available to the poor of
the world—not a “high tech” electrical device or a new energy source, but simply
a technique to cook with the sun—using a fuel-free, labor-saving device, the solar
cooker. The author’s own experience and that of NGOs is reported. Solar cooking
requires not only a radical shift in thinking about how we cook our food, but
it also has many potential environmental, economic, and social benefits for billions
of people.
I
n 1970, Francis Schaeffer published
a paperback with the depressing title,
Pollution and the Death of Man.1
Although Schaeffer is widely known
among evangelical Christians, this is not
one of his more widely known books.
It was one of the first books by an evangelical on the subject of “ecology” (actually, environmental ethics or what today
is often called “creation care”). In it,
Schaeffer recognized the serious problems of environmental damage in modern life, which cry out for solutions that
can harness our Christian zeal in order
to reduce pollution and rescue the environment. I was reminded of Schaeffer’s
book while reading Jack Swearengen’s
comprehensive book, Beyond Paradise:
Technology and the Kingdom of God.2
Schaeffer challenged the church to act
as a “pilot plant,” to set an example of
environmental stewardship to the world.
Stewardship should inspire Christians to
practical action, both locally and globally,3
and it should lead them away from
eschatological fatalism.4
The Challenge of
Environmental Stewardship
It is not just about us. As Americans, our
thinking about creation care naturally
tends to focus on issues close at hand.
We consider the fuel economy of cars
and the cost of utilities for our homes.
We worry about contamination of our
food, excessive use of pesticides, and
the reliability of electric power for our
freezers and computers. These are the
problems of a developed country. Meanwhile, there are billions of people around
the world who live in comparative poverty. They are vulnerable to their environment in many ways, they suffer
greatly, and we live alongside them on
the same planet. This is an area in which
scientists and technologists can intervene to offer innovative and appropriate
solutions—especially when motivated
by an ethic of other-centered Christian
compassion.
5
But to be appropriate,
interventions need to be carefully considered from the bottom-up viewpoint of
62 Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith
Article
As an undergraduate, Paul Arvesonbecame a Christian in 1963. He received
a BS in Physics from Virginia Tech and an MS in Computer Systems
Management from the University of Maryland. He served as a civilian
employee in the Navy, conducting research in acoustics and oceanography,
and designed systems for signal processing and analysis. In 1998 Paul
cofounded the Balanced Scorecard Institute, a management consulting firm.
Paul has maintained a lifelong interest in issues of faith and science through
his work with the ASA; he now serves as Secretary of the DC Metro Section.
Paul facilitates a Sunday adult class at his church and was a cofounder of the
C. S. Lewis Institute. Recently he has joined the Board of Solar Household
Energy. He also currently serves on the Board of Managers of the Washington
Academy of Sciences.
Paul Arvesonthe recipient. Thus, a first step in planning aid programs is to visualize in some detail the actual situation of the person in need. Constructing scenarios of
people different from ourselves may lead to a better
understanding of their needs. Such a scenario is provided in the example below, based on a compilation
of field data.
A Day in the Life of Sarah
Sarah lives in a very sunny and warm part of the
world. She lives with her husband in a stick-andboard house in a small village. It has a bedroom and
a kitchen. They grow enough food to subsist, including beans, squash, and tomatoes, and Sarah trades
some of these for corn and meat at the village marketplace. The family has to drink water from a muddy
creek, because they often cannot afford to buy water
from the tank truck that occasionally comes through
the village. Sarah cooks in the traditional way. She
moves three large stones together, then lights a fire in
a pile of sticks and sets a pot over it. Sarah and her
children are always coughing due to cooking smoke
from burning sticks and dried dung. One of her
children died of a lung disease last year.
Sarah’s husband works in a field all day. For this,
Sarah is grateful; many men have either left their
wives or spend the day drinking and hanging out.
They have four children. The older children stay
around home and play; they cannot afford to buy
the uniforms required to go to school.
Sarah gets up about 5:00 a.m. and lights a fire of
sticks. She boils some water and makes hot cereal for
breakfast. Sarah also makes a lunch for her husband
to bring to the fields. Next she feeds her children,
and then herself. After cleaning up, Sarah gathers
clothes that need cleaning and walks to the creek to
wash them, with one child strapped to her back and
escorting a toddler. She brings home the wash and
hangs it up to dry in the hot sun.
Her children help in gathering sticks for firewood.
They sometimes have to walk several miles to find
sufficient wood, and then they must carry the load
back on their heads. All the local wood has been
gathered already, and nearby landowners are scaring away poor people from gathering on their land.
Often children get injured by thorns and insect bites.
And it is always dangerous for women and children
to be out in the woods alone.
Sometimes Sarah runs out of wood for the fire,
because her children could not walk far enough to
find a sufficient quantity. At these times she has to
trade food for firewood. In the hot afternoon, she
prepares lunch for the children and herself, by once
again cutting up some sticks and starting the threestone fire. After lunch she has some time to gather
vegetables from her garden; she shells some beans
and puts them into a soaking pot.
By late afternoon her husband returns home, tired
and hungry. Sarah has prepared a meal of vegetables
and rice over the fire. She feeds the children, scrubs
out the cooking pots, and goes to bed—exhausted,
coughing, and hot.
Billions of Sarahs
It is estimated that 2.5 billion people depend on food
cooked indoors over open fires with biofuels, much
as humans have done for hundreds of thousands of
years.
6
According to the World Health Organization,
this practice leads to respiratory diseases, accounting
for nearly two million deaths per year, mostly of
women and children.
7
In rural Peru, for instance, a typical household
will burn 3.6 tons of wood per year for heating and
cooking.
8
Such consumption of firewood has many
ripple effects. This wood must be either gathered
by hand or purchased—one of the major household
expenses. Fuel and food preparation consume so
much time that women cannot earn extra income.
They cannot send their children to school because
they do not have enough money for school uniforms,
and they need the children to gather wood and do
other chores.
9
So, in many areas, the education level
is not improving. These are chronic lifestyle habits
that are not affected much by short-term government
or NGO interventions.
The cumulative effect of a billion cooking fires (as
well as slash-and-burn agriculture and other fires)
adds significantly to the amount of black carbon,
10
aerosols,
11
and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Pollution of air, water, and earth (soil erosion) are
evident in many places. The constant gathering of
living and dead wood leads to deforestation and
habitat loss. For example, in Haiti, the contrast
between its barren land and the forests of the Dominican Republic can be seen clearly on satellite maps.
12
Volume 64, Number 1, March 2012 63
Paul ArvesonThe Energy-Poverty-Climate
Nexus
In the year 2000, the United Nations announced eight
global goals that must be achieved to meet the needs
of people like Sarah.
The Millennium Development Goals
Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger.
Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education.
Goal 3: Promote gender equality and empower
women.
Goal 4: Reduce child mortality.
Goal 5: Improve maternal health.
Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other
diseases.
Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability.
Goal 8: Develop a global partnership for development.13
In reaching these goals, we need not assume that
development in the less developed nations will take
the same path that Western civilization took—along
with its excesses. It is not necessarily desirable that
the solution forthemis to havewhatwe have. The ultimate consumer “dream” may not be to have a big
home with a dishwasher, a freezer, and an electric
stove (along with all the resource demands, infrastructure costs, and environmental impacts that these
products entail). In the colonial era, the USA was
powered by wood. In the twentieth century, petroleum and its plastic and chemical products dominated. But with the advent of technologies such as
the Internet, cell phones, satellites, fiber optics, vaccines, and nanotechnology, it is becoming possible
for developing countries to “leapfrog” over energyintensive products and to develop by more efficient
paths. In some cases, it only takes a small amount
of technology transfer to achieve significant economic impacts. This article will describe one such
technology.
Daniel Kammen, a climate expert at the World
Bank, noted that there is a “nexus” between energy,
poverty, and climate change.
14
All three challenges
are complementary; they impact each other. For
example, as the story of Sarah’s lifestyle indicates,
reducing the need for firewood can also have
an impact on poverty and climate change. Cooking
over a fire is a major part of daily life, primarily of
women. Moreover, the cost of fuel, or the labor in
collecting firewood, is often a significant fraction of
total household costs.
15
Because biomass fire-based
cooking takes so much time and labor every day,
it robs women and children of other opportunities
such as education and small business. Hence, inefficient, fire-based cooking is one of the main causes
of many social, health, economic, and environmental
problems.
16
The Solar Cooker
For many regions of the world, one approach to
address the “nexus” is solar cooking. A solar cooker
is a device that uses concentrated sunlight to cook
foods. It does not require photovoltaic (PV) or other
complex technologies; the only innovation required
is a polished metal surface such as aluminum foil
or metalized plastic film. Although it is “high tech”
in terms of manufacturing, metalized film is very
inexpensive and is now widely used as food
packaging.
There are three basic types of solar cookers (figure 1), with many variations available:
1. Parabolic cookers, which use curved reflectors
to focus sunlight onto a small area where a pot
or teapot is mounted. Some designs include
a sun-tracking device.
2. Panel cookers, in which flat sheets of shiny metal
are arranged to focus sunlight on a black pot.
3. Box cookers, in which an insulated box covered
with a transparent window captures sunlight
to heat a black pot in the box.
There is a continuum from devices that heat by
concentrating sunlight (parabolics) to devices that
cook simply by retaining heat. Thus fuel-free cooker
designs may be arranged in this order:
1. True parabolics with a high light concentration
factor;
2. Modified parabolics (e.g., troughs);
3. Panel cookers with a transparent enclosure to
reduce convective heat loss (This also includes
evacuated tubes and solar hot water collectors.);
4. Boxes with shiny reflectors internally and
externally;
64 Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith
Article
Integrated Solar Cooking: An Underutilized Solution5. Boxes with shiny external reflectors and black
internal surfaces;
6. Boxes with no reflectors and black internal
surfaces; and
7. Retained-heat insulated containers (no light
input).
Solar cookers can also be characterized by three
physical parameters:
• food and container mass
• light concentration factor
• net heat loss factor
The time it takes to heat food or water can be
obtained from Newton’s law of heating and cooling.
The cooking time is directly proportional to the mass
of the food and the pot, and the mean specific heat
of the food and the pot, and inversely proportional
to the reflector area and light concentration factor.
Typically, a solar cooker takes from 1.5 to 2.5 hours
to cook a meal. It performs like the slow cooker or
“crock pot” in many American kitchens.
The maximum temperature achieved by a solar
cooker is also dependent on the rate of heat loss;
at equilibrium, the losses will equal the solar input.
To reduce cooking time, the cooking pots and container walls are usually painted black. But at equilibrium, radiation loss will equal incoming solar
radiation energy (Kirchhoff’s law). Convection is also
an efficient cause of heat loss, so box cookers must
use a tightly sealed box. Of course, for water-based
foods such as rice, polenta, or stews, the maximum
internal temperature is self-limited to around 100°C.
Thus the main cooking requirements—quantity of
food and cooking time—lead to solar cooker design
requirements. Each type and size of cooker has its
appropriate uses. For frying foods, parabolic or other
curved reflectors can attain very high temperatures
by concentrating sunlight on a small spot where a
pot or frying pan is placed. These devices cook food
in a short time, although the reflector must be turned
frequently to keep it aligned to the sun direction.
For emergencies, and in refugee situations, a lowcost cardboard-and-aluminum panel cooker called
the CooKit has been developed by Solar Cookers
International (SCI). Tens of thousands of these
devices have been distributed in camps in Africa.
17
The CooKit design is simple and can be made locally
with existing materials such as cardboard and any
kind of shiny material, e.g., aluminum foil, or even
potato chip bags, candy wrappers, or cigarette
packs.
18
The reflective panel can be used with any
black pot, as long as it is enclosed in a roaster bag to
reduce convection. It can reach temperatures around
120°C.
19
In addition to cooking food, the CooKit is
used for pasteurizing water and milk, because experiments have shown that to pasteurize water it is
only necessary to achieve a temperature of 65°C;
it is not necessary to boil the water.
20
A more durable general-purpose panel cooker is
the HotPot, which includes a polished aluminum
reflector, a glass bowl and cover, and an inner black
enameled steel pot. The glass bowl acts to prevent
convective heat loss. This product is well made and
will last for many years. The author has personally
used a HotPot cooker for a couple of years to cook
Volume 64, Number 1, March 2012 65
Paul Arveson
Figure 1. Solar Cooker Types.
Parabolic Cooker Panel Cooker (“HotPot”) Box Cooker (Sun Oven™)vegetables, rib roasts, hot dogs, hamburgers, and
cakes. He is one of many people in Washington DC,
and other places around the USA who cook frequently with a solar cooker (figure 2).
Box cookers can be made of plywood, cardboard,
or molded polymers. A simple box cooker design
tested in Guatemala achieved 120°C in 30 minutes.
21
One commercial product, the Sun Oven™, claims
to achieve temperatures of over 180°C.
22
Panel and
box cookers do not need to be turned or adjusted
frequently, and the pot does not need to be tended
during cooking. These realities free up time for
other activities. The American Society of Agricultural Engineers has published a standard for performance measurements of box cookers; international
standards for solar cookers are currently being
developed.
23
Integrated Solar—Biomass
Cooking
What does a solar cook do on cloudy days, or after
dark? To provide for this, a modern fuel-e icient stove
is recommended. Many designs have recently been
developed. They are small and lightweight, typically
made of clay or steel with insulated walls. They are
efficient because of carefully designed air flow and
reduced thermal mass. They can cook a meal quickly
with only a small handful of wood or other biomass.
Within the past year, a major effort has been
launched to scale up the introduction of fuel-efficient
stoves, the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves
(GACC). Funded by hundreds of partners, the GACC
seeks to distribute 10 million efficient stoves (including LPG stoves).
24 With widespread recognition,
celebrity endorsements, and numerous meetings, the
GACC has rapidly succeeded in focusing government and NGO efforts, primarily aimed at improving
indoor air quality.
If food is cooked on a sunny afternoon in the solar
cooker, how is it kept warm for the evening meal
after sunset? For this purpose, a third component is
required: a large insulated basket or box, which is lined
with a thick insulating material such as straw or
wool to reduce the heat loss factor. If a pot of hot
food is stored in such a container, it will continue to
cook and stay warm for hours.
The combination of these three simple devices—
a solar cooker, a fuel-efficient stove, and a heat
storage container—provides a complete “integrated
cooking solution” for people in sunny regions all
over the world, particularly in northern Africa and
the Middle East, Central America, India and central
Asia, Australia, and western South America. Haiti,
for example, is dry for at least half the year—
an excellent candidate for solar cooking.
25
Fuel-efficient stoves reduce firewood requirements significantly. But solar cookers use no fuel at
all. Thus, solar cookers can serve to drive down fuel
costs for the poor, as well as reduce the environmental and health impacts from burning fuels.
Ongoing Solar Cooking Projects
Solar cooking devices are in widespread use in India,
and production of solar cookers is growing rapidly
in China.
26
For instance, there is an institution that
feeds 30,000 people each day from a large solar
cooker installation in India.
27
Solar Cookers International (SCI) has distributed tens of thousands of
CooKits and other cooker products to African countries and Haiti.
28
Solar Household Energy (SHE) is a nonprofit
organization located in the Washington DC area to
build awareness and support for solar cooking. (The
author joined the board of this organization
recently.) SHE has conducted field projects in El Salvador, Mexico, the Dominican Republic, Bolivia,
Haiti, Senegal, and Chad. These projects are being
evaluated to assess long-term acceptance by cooks
66 Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith
Article
Integrated Solar Cooking: An Underutilized Solution
Figure 2. Solar cooking on a snow day in DC, Feb. 2010.in these countries. SHE also conducts research on
cooker designs and is partnering with other US nonprofit organizations to collect detailed measurements to improve cooker performance.
This year SHE established or advanced several
important relationships, and provided technical
assistance to these new partners. The United Nations
High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) contracted with SHE to train 48 women in the Gaga
refugee camp in Chad to solar cook, and to distribute HotPot solar ovens for them to use (figure 3).
UNHCR was interested in this project as a pilot to
determine if a larger-scale program of solar ovens
is warranted in the camps. The preliminary results
are positive. The following description of the project
is excerpted from SHE’s final report to UNHCR:
The preliminary results indicate that introducing
solar cooking has caused them [the participants]
to reduce their wood use by an average of 25–40%
after only two months. These savings are likely to
grow over time and could be further increased
by additional measures. The users are extremely
enthusiastic about their new HotPots and have
adapted their cooking to use them every midday
meal.29
These results indicate that cultural acceptance and
lifestyle changes are feasible. However, the scale of
the projects so far has been small. SHE and SCI hope
to scale up the size and duration of these projects,
and many plans need to be prepared in order to be
ready for this. SHE is currently working on ways to
develop and test microfinancing practices, so that
in-country entrepreneurs can enable solar cooking
practices to grow organically within a country. This is
a challenging, multidisciplinary long-term effort.
Challenges to the Introduction of
Solar Cooking
It is gratifying to see the beginning of a large-scale
introduction of more fuel-efficient biomass and LPG
stoves around the world. However, fuel-efficient
stoves of any kind still use fuels, they still generate
CO2, they reduce but do not eliminate deforestation,
and they still require users to pay fuel costs and fuel
distribution costs. In sunny regions, solar cooking
can drive down costs, labor, pollution, and deforestation still further. But scaling up of solar cooker use
faces several serious challenges. As Steve Jobs has
said, “A lot of times, people do not know what they
want until you show it to them.”
30
Many people in developing countries do not recognize solar cooking as a potential solution because
it is such a paradigm shift in their thinking about
how food is cooked. This is certainly understandable, and it implies that adequate training and careful adaptation to the local cooking practices is
necessary for effective acceptance. However, based
on recent pilot field projects, there is ample evidence
that many users do accept solar cookers, especially
as they begin to realize the economic, labor, and
health benefits.
Despite the great potential benefits, currently
there is little recognition of solar cooking in the
USA. Field projects are small, because there are few
significant sources of funding, either from nonprofit
organizations or government agencies. Many people
in developed countries, accustomed as we are to gas,
electric, and microwave cooking, are unfamiliar
with the concept of solar cooking. This is indicated
in some common objections or misconceptions, such
as the following.
“Two hours is too long to cook a meal.” This objection
is based on a misconception. Although solar cooking takes more “wall clock time,” it takes much less
actual labor time because food does not have to be
stirred, as it does over a fire. Panel or box cookers
work like an oven or slow cooker in a developedworld kitchen. You put the food in, then go away
and do some other productive work. Moreover, solar
Volume 64, Number 1, March 2012 67
Paul Arveson
Figure 3. Women solar cooking in refugee camp in Chad.cooking significantly reduces the labor and time for
wood gathering, cutting, preparing the fire, and other
tasks. By visualizing “a day in the life” of the solar
cook, one can begin to recognize more benefits that
follow from this labor-saving use of the sun.
“Solar cookers don’t get hot enough.” Of course they
do; people cook with them all over the world.
But like any technological product, a solar cooker
must be “the right tool for the job.” Selection of the
product must begin from the end user’s requirements (including food types, latitude, climate, etc.)
to derive design parameters such as those suggested
above. Users need to know how to orient the cooker
to the sun angle, anchor it properly, and so forth.
Some well-intentioned interventions have reported
poor performance because the products were not
appropriate for the conditions, or because users were
not properly trained in their use.
31
“Solar cookers cost too much for the poor.” It is true
that the initial product cost may be prohibitive—
for clean cookstoves as well as for solar cookers—
but microfinancing methods are being implemented
to reduce initial cost, and the reduction in fuel cost
over time will decrease total cost of ownership. The
economic rationale is parallel to that for fuel-efficient
cookstoves. But more research is needed in order
to design cookers that use lower-cost materials and
reduced manufacturing labor, and to refine funding
methods.
A key challenge is the lack of long-term evaluations of previous field projects. Often interventions
begin with great enthusiasm, but follow-up reports
are inadequate. Cooking is a daily routine that varies
widely around the world; the appropriateness of a
technological solution needs to be carefully matched
to the “cooking facts” of a particular region or village. This requires anthropological data (e.g., “a day
in the life of Sarah”) as well as feedback from users,
in order to optimize the fit for maximum usage.
Video ethnography is a new technique that could be
very helpful in this regard.
32
There are numerous challenges of solar cooking
that can be discouraging—until we are reminded of
the large potential benefits of this technology for
many people, as well as for the global environment.
In fact, solar cooking has benefits that directly or
indirectly cover every one of the eight Millennium
Development Goals.
The Role of Christians in Meeting
the Challenges
Christian organizations are playing a key role in
achieving the Millennium Development Goals.
Faith-based NGO’s have advantages over government-sponsored programs in ensuring environmental sustainability. In a recent white paper, Amy
Gambrill, a USAID official quoted advice from the
findings of the African Biodiversity Collaborative
Group as follows:
Reach out to faith communities for dialogue and
collaboration. The global urgency for a sustainable
world demandsmultidimensional approaches and
a persistent push for ideals based on innovative
and pragmatic strategies. Faith-based communities comprise the largest social organizations in
Africa, representing a repository of opportunities
to spread the cause for sustainability in the continent. Conservation leaders should reach out
to religious communities to collaborate in implementing these recommendations, with a view to
enhancing the capacity for value-based sustainability decisions that link nature and human wellbeing.33
Gambrill notes that a purely technical approach
to environmental challenges may overlook human
values and motivations in the local culture, which
frame the worldview of the people we intend to
reach with interventions. Government-based aid
programs typically have a short lifespan and cannot
sustain long-term efforts. But mission organizations
are often more trusted than governmental agencies,
and they are going to be around for the long term
to encourage adoption of new methods and products.
Hence, some mission organizations are learning to
partner and “piggyback” each other’s programs to
provide better care for the whole person’s physical
and spiritual needs.
Summary: The Sun Is Manna
from Heaven
During the Exodus in the wilderness, the Israelites
became hungry, and they suffered and grumbled to
Moses (Exodus 16). God gave them manna. In the
68 Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith
Article
Integrated Solar Cooking: An Underutilized Solutiondryer areas of the earth, the sun is energy “manna”
from heaven. It is distributed freely each day and
almost every day. Like manna, each one can gather
as much as she needs. Like manna, it cannot be stored
but must be used on a daily basis. But until recently,
it has not been possible to gather this “manna.” One
bit of new technology has changed that: metallized
film and aluminum foil—materials that are now
available cheaply everywhere, and are often considered trash. With this shiny material and other lowcost materials, the Sarahs of this world can obtain
appropriately designed solar cookers and start gathering the “manna,” cease gathering so much firewood, and immediately begin to enjoy the many
benefits of solar cooking. 쉆
Notes
1
Francis A. Schaeffer, Pollution and the Death of Man
(Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 1970).
2
Jack Clayton Swearengen, Beyond Paradise: Technology and
the Kingdom of God (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2007), 275.
3
Joseph K. Sheldon, Rediscovery of Creation: A Bibliographical
Study of the Church’s Response to the Environmental Crisis
(Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1992), 29.
4Al Truesdale, “Last Things First: The Impact of Eschatology
on Ecology,” Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 46
(June 1994): 116–22.
5Daniel A. Salomon, Creation Unveiled (Xulon Press, 2003),
101.
6
International Energy Agency, World Energy Outlook 2009
(Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2009), 134. Regarding the earliest use of fire, see
R. Rowlett et al., “Friendly Fire: The First Campfires Helped
Hominids Survive the Night,” Discovering Archaeology 1,
no. 5 (1999): 82–9.
7N. Bruce, R. Perez-Padilla, and R. Albalak, “Indoor Air
Pollution in Developing Countries: A Major Environmental
and Public Health Challenge,” Bulletin of the World Health
Organization, 78, no. 9 (2000): 1078.
8
P. N. Bodereau, “Peruvian Highlands, Fume-Free,” Science
334 (October 14, 2011): 157.
9
“Lack of a school uniform is often the single obstacle to a
child getting an education,” SOMB report, http://www
.sombstyle.com/pages/story.
10
V. Ramanathan et al., “Indian Ocean Experiment: An
Integrated Analysis of the Climate Forcing and Effects of
the Great Indo-Asian Haze,” Journal of Geophysics Research
106, no. D22 (Nov. 27, 2001): 28,371–98; and Black Carbon
e-Bulletin, United Nations Environment Programme(UNEP) 1,
no. 1 (July 2009).
11
Carolyn Gramling, “Aerosols Altered Asian Monsoons,”
Science 333 (September 30, 2011): 1808.
12Ann Gibbons, “Greening Haiti, Tree by Tree,” Science 327
(February 5, 2010): 640–2.
13United Nations Millennium Development Goals Report,
2011.
14
C. E. Casillas and D. M. Kammen, “The Energy-PovertyClimate Nexus,” Science 330 (November 26, 2010): 1181–2.
15United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO),
State of the World’s Forests 2011 (Rome: FAO, 2011).
16World Health Organization, Health in the Green Economy:
Co-benefits to Health of Climate Change Mitigation—Housing
Sector (Geneva, Switzerland: WHO Press, 2011).
17
B. Loskota, “Solar Cooker Project Evaluation: Iridimi
Refugee Camp, Chad, October 2007,” http://www
.jewishworldwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06
/Solar_Cooker_Project_Evaluation.pdf; and D. B. Wood,
“Simple Sun-Cooker Takes Off as a Way to Help Darfuris,”
Christian Science Monitor, July 26, 2007.
18
Patricia McArdle, Farishta (New York: Riverhead Books,
2011), 180.
19
SolarCookers International,http://www.solarcookers.org/.
20D. A. Ciochetti and R. H. Metcalf, “Pasteurization of Naturally Contaminated Water with Solar Energy,” Applied and
Environmental Microbiology (February 1984): 223–8.
21D.M. Kammen andW. F. Lankford, “Comparative Study of
Box-Type Solar Cookers in Nicaragua,” Solar andWind Technology 7, no. 1 (1990): 463–71.
22
Sun Oven™, http://www.sunoven.com/.
23American Society of Agricultural Engineers, “Testing and
Reporting Solar Cooker Performance,” ASAE S580 (January
2003).
24N. Adams, Household Cookstoves, Environment, Health, and
Climate Change: A New Look at an Old Problem (Washington,
DC: The World Bank, 2011).
25Gibbons, “Greening Haiti, Tree by Tree,” 640.
26United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change, Project 2307: Federal Intertrade Pengyang Solar
Cooker Project, Validation Report, November 23, 2007.
27
http://solarcooking.wikia.com/wiki/Tirumala_Tirupati_
Devasthanam.
28G. Simbriger-Williams, “Solar Cookers Everywhere—
Assessing Progress in Iridimi Refugee Camp,” Solar Cooker
Review (March 2008).
29
Solar Household Energy Annual Report, FY 2011, http
://she-inc.org/ar2011.pdf.
30Quoted in Bloomberg Business Week special issue,
October 10, 2011.
31D. M. Kammen and W. F. Lankford, “Cooking in the Sunshine,” Nature 348 (November 29, 1990): 385–6.
32
J. H. Schaeffer, “Videotape: New Techniques of Observation and Analysis in Anthropology,” in Principles of Visual
Anthropology, ed. Paul Hockings (Berlin: Mouton de
Gruyter, 1995).
33Amy Gambrill, “From Practice to Policy to Practice: Connecting Faith and Conservation in Africa,” USAID White
Paper, January 2011.
Volume 64, Number 1, March 2012 69
Paul Arveson
ASA Members: Submit comments and questions on this article
at www.asa3.org 숤 FORUMS 숤 PSCF DISCUSSION.
God and Nature
http://asa3.org/zine
Sources : http://www.she-inc.org/docs/143.pdf
0 commentaires:
Post a Comment