Energy, Economy and Environmental Performance of Liquefied Petroleum Gas and Natural Gas as Domestic Cooking Fuels in Tanzania

This study broadly assessed the energy, economic, and environmental performance of shifting from charcoal to liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and compressed natural gas (CNG). The energy performance focuses on comparing energy consumption and thermal efficiency ( η th ), while in the economy, the focus is on daily and annual fuel costs. In environmental benefits, pollutants such as carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NO), sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) and noxious (NOx) were compared between LPG, CNG and charcoal modes during water boiling tests (WBTs). Findings showed that WBT under LPG mode had an average η th of 62.93% compared to 50.63% in CNG mode. Besides, shifting from charcoal to LPG could save around 73.7% of fuel, while charcoal to CNG could save about 72.9% of fuel. In an economic point of view, transitioning from charcoal to LPG and CNG might save up to 70.7 and 71.7% of the fuel cost each year, respectively. In environmental benefits, shifting from charcoal to LPG could reduce CO 2 , CO, NO and NOx by approximately 3.20; 11.13; 14.76; and 14.90 times, while shifting from charcoal to CNG could save CO 2 , CO, NO and NOx by approximately 3.45, 2.68, 12.18 and 12.30 times, respectively. The findings revealed that the CO 2 level aligns with the recommended levels of the WHO. The CO levels from LPG, CNG and charcoal exceeded the WHO levels by 4.9, 20.4 and 54.8 times, shedding light on stakeholders to find strategies to lessen the CO levels.