Conclusion and discussion

All in all we can see that we made a satisfying cookstove that meets the needs of the
customer. It is more efficient, affordable, faster and it emits less smoke. However, it is
hard to say how reliable these results are. We could not test all cookstoves on one day,
because we only had one pot that had to be cold at the beginning of the test. Because
of that, we did all tests on different days, but that means that the circumstances were
different. For example on some days the wind blows much harder than on other days,
which may affect the results. Also, every time we used different wood, because we just
gathered wood in the surroundings. It could be that for one test we used better wood
for burning than for the other test, which of course affects the results. It can be said
that the tests would be much more reliable if all the cookstoves were tested several
times to exclude these kinds of exceptions from our results.
Furthermore, for the user test we gave the cookstove to the women on KITA to use it
for cooking large portions of food. However, these women do not belong to our main
target group, the kenkey makers. Also, the interviews we have had with these women
were in Twi and translated by our Ghanaian project associates. We are not sure if the
Ghanaian students translated all relevant information.
We found out that the second prototype was less efficient than the first one. However,
it is much more user friendly and still much more efficient than the three stone fire.
Therefore, we decided that the second prototype would be a better option, although
it is a bit less efficient. It needs to be said that we are not sure about the reliability of
these results because of the problems as discussed earlier.