Koko Networks, a Kenyan bioethanol fuel company that expanded access to cleaner cooking for households without public gas systems, shut down abruptly after approvals required for carbon-credit sales and bioethanol imports were not granted. The shutdown has left thousands of fuel supply points idle and has disrupted a model that had been promoted as a cleaner alternative to charcoal stoves across parts of Kenya.
The company’s approach was built around consumer convenience, with Koko outlets allowing customers to purchase refills for cooking canisters. Over more than a decade, Koko Networks helped move over 1.5 million Kenyan homes away from smoky charcoal stoves to bioethanol fuel, offering what many customers saw as a cleaner, modern way to cook.
In Nairobi’s Kibera, the largest informal settlement, outlets have closed and some dispensers have been removed since the shutdown, according to the report. Nationally, more than 3,000 Koko fuel supply points sit idle, with households that relied on the service now facing uncertainty about whether fuel will return.
Fredrick Onchenge, who said he used to serve up to 50 Koko customers a day, described how the change landed suddenly. “Initially, I was confused,” Onchenge said. “Then it dawned on me what had just happened. My livelihood was gone. I tried calling the salesperson, but their phone was switched off.”
For some customers, access ended after receiving a text message announcing the shutdown. Grace Kathambi said the service was financially crucial to her household and that Koko had been the best alternative when other options were out of reach. “This was a life changer for me,” Kathambi said. “I could not afford the $8 needed to refill a gas cylinder, and Koko was my best alternative. With about 30 U.S. cents, I could buy enough Koko fuel to cook.”
With bioethanol supplies cut off, households that had depended on the service are now choosing between returning to charcoal or finding money for more expensive liquefied petroleum gas, the report said. Margaret Auma said Koko had made life easier for people working casual jobs and that families now feel abandoned. “Koko made life very easy for those of us who earn little from casual jobs. We feel abandoned, yet it’s not our fault.”
The shutdown followed years of regulatory friction around what Koko needed to keep its model functioning. Koko sought government authorization connected to carbon credits and also relied on import permits for bioethanol made from molasses, a byproduct of sugarcane. In late 2023, the government withheld an import permit, forcing Koko to use local sources that the report described as erratic and more expensive.
In the final phase before closing, the company and Kenyan officials haggled over a letter authorizing carbon credits and bioethanol import permits. Koko said in a Jan. 30 announcement that without the approvals its business model was financially unsustainable and that it was shutting down, according to the report.
David Ndii, Kenya’s presidential adviser on economic affairs, defended the government’s caution about the carbon-credit framework and other issues tied to the project. Ndii said the case was “uniquely multidimensional,” citing Paris Agreement-related concerns, questions around the credibility of cookstove carbon credits, Kenya’s climate policies, carbon market regulations, the transparency of Koko’s business model, and diplomatic considerations. He also dismissed the prospect of state intervention, saying, “Even good doctors lose patients.”
Kenya’s energy and treasury officials did not comment on the closure, the report said. Amos Wemanya, a senior analyst on renewable energy at Power Shift Africa, described the shutdown as part of a broader clean-cooking crisis that affects health and daily survival, saying, “This is not just about emissions or climate targets. It is about development, health, dignity and household survival.”
Wemanya argued that models heavily reliant on carbon credits risk prioritizing markets over people. “We are not going to solve the clean cooking challenge through carbon math or carbon credit spreadsheets,” he said. “Carbon markets allow polluters to continue emitting while households, who are supposed to be the beneficiaries, still pay for the stoves and bear the risks when projects fail.” He said when such systems collapse, households are forced back to harmful alternatives like charcoal and paraffin.
For Auma and others facing the immediate choice, the report described the transition away from Koko as a return to smoke and expense. “What are we supposed to do? Go back to using charcoal in our one-room houses?” Auma asked. “That is the smoke and sickness we were trying to escape.”