Too many cooks spoil the carbon footprint

From the American Chemical Society  it seems that newer is not always better. Even Yale environment360 bought into this idea. I should add that I’m all for reducing carbon soot, but in the zealous rush for solutions, sometimes too many cooks spoil the soup.

IndiaEnvirofit

Right: Primitive stoves and open fires pose serious health risks, particularly among women and children. Image: angelic_shrek/flickr. Left: Envirofit says its cook stove will cut smoke and carbon emissions by 80 percent. Image Envirofit

 

Some ‘improved cookstoves’ may emit more pollution than traditional mud cookstoves

The first real-world, head-to-head comparison of “improved cookstoves” (ICs) and traditional mud stoves has found that some ICs may at times emit more of the worrisome “black carbon,” or soot, particles that are linked to serious health and environmental concerns than traditional mud stoves or open-cook fires. The report, which raises concerns about the leading hope as a clean cooking technology in the developing world, appears in ACS’ journal Environmental Science & Technology.

Abhishek Kar, Hafeez Rehman, Jennifer Burney and colleagues explain that hundreds of millions of people in developing countries in South Asia, Africa and South America are exposed to soot from mud stoves and 3-stone fires used for cooking, heating and light. The particles can be inhaled deeply into the lungs and have been linked to health problems similar to those associated with cigarette smoking. In addition, black soot released into the atmosphere is a major factor in global warming. Aid agencies and governments have been seeking replacements for traditional cookstoves and fires to remedy those problems, with ICs as one of the leading hopes. Until now, however, there have been little real-world data on the actual performance of ICs — which have features like enhanced air flow and a battery-powered fan to burn wood and other fuel more cleanly.

The researchers measured black carbon emissions from five IC models and traditional mud stoves. They did the test in real homes as part of Project Surya, which quantifies the impacts of cleaner cooking technologies in a village in India. Forced draft stoves burned cleaner than any other IC. However, black carbon concentrations from all ICs varied significantly, even for the same stove from one day to the next. Surprisingly, some natural draft stoves occasionally emitted more black carbon than the traditional mud cookstove.

###

The researchers acknowledge funding from private donors, the National Science Foundation, the Swedish International Development Agency, the United Nations Environment Programme, the Vetlesen Foundation and the Alderson Foundation.

The American Chemical Society is a nonprofit organization chartered by the U.S. Congress. With more than 164,000 members, ACS is the world’s largest scientific society and a global leader in providing access to chemistry-related research through its multiple databases, peer-reviewed journals and scientific conferences. Its main offices are in Washington, D.C., and Columbus, Ohio.

==============================================================

“Real-time Assessment of Black Carbon Pollution in Indian Households Due to Traditional and Improved Biomass Cookstoves” Environ. Sci. Technol., 2012, 46 (5), pp 2993–3000. DOI: 10.1021/es203388g

Abstract

Use of improved (biomass) cookstoves (ICs) has been widely proposed as a Black Carbon (BC) mitigation measure with significant climate and health benefits. ICs encompass a range of technologies, including natural draft (ND) stoves, which feature structural modifications to enhance air flow, and forced draft (FD) stoves, which additionally employ an external fan to force air into the combustion chamber. We present here, under Project Surya, the first real-time in situ Black Carbon (BC) concentration measurements from five commercial ICs and a traditional (mud) cookstove for comparison.

These experiments reveal four significant findings about the tested stoves. First, FD stoves emerge as the superior IC technology, reducing plume zone BC concentration by a factor of 4 (compared to 1.5 for ND). Indoor cooking-time BC concentrations, which varied from 50 to 1000 μg m–3 for the traditional mud cookstove, were reduced to 5–100 μg m–3 by the top-performing FD stove. Second, BC reductions from IC models in the same technology category vary significantly: for example, some ND models occasionally emit more BC than a traditional cookstove. Within the ND class, only microgasification stoves were effective in reducing BC.

Third, BC concentration varies significantly for repeated cooking cycles with same stove (standard deviation up to 50% of mean concentration) even in a standardized setup, highlighting inherent uncertainties in cookstove performance. Fourth, use of mixed fuel (reflective of local practices) increases plume zone BC concentration (compared to hardwood) by a factor of 2 to 3 across ICs.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

85 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Greg, San Diego, CA
April 9, 2012 9:14 am

Just another example of the “enviros” jumping in with a “solution” without truly testing the solution. Someone is profiting from the IC, whether it works or not!

Hugo Van Dofrenzeim
April 9, 2012 9:21 am

Seems very strange that they wouldn’t instead note efficiency in terms of fuel use. Fragile ecosystems are being destroyed by this, and use of charcol. If these can for example boil a given amount of water while using less wood or charcol, that would seem to justify their use. BC is not the issue.

Bloke down the pub
April 9, 2012 9:28 am

Now if only there was a technology somewhere that allowed you to burn fuel efficiently at a central location and convert it into clean electricity, that way you could eliminate soot in the home altogether. Oh well, some day maybe.

Luther Wu
April 9, 2012 9:33 am

From the article: “Two billion people, one-third of the people on Earth, are caught in a time warp, with no access to modern energy.” says Lakshman Guruswami
______________________________
And so, the modern “Green” dilemma and the world’s choice.
Follow the edicts of the “concerned” and condemn your own population; not a difficult choice for the less developed nations to make.
All that’s left for them to do is to try to pick the pockets of the developed world.

John from CA
April 9, 2012 9:35 am

Right: Primitive stoves and open fires pose serious health risks, particularly among women and children. Image: angelic_shrek/flickr. Left: Envirofit says its cook stove will cut smoke and carbon emissions by 80 percent.
“Your other right” it s/b reversed, the eco thing is on the “Right”

Kaboom
April 9, 2012 9:38 am

I’d assume a centralized communal cooking area in villages with rocket stoves would be both the most efficient, lowest on soot and please lefty sensibilities at the same time.

John from CA
April 9, 2012 9:44 am

Willis needs to weigh in on this one but, if memory serves, the point of the eco-friendly cook stove is increased efficiency. If the fuel is efficiently burned there would be decreased consumption of limited resources and decreased emissions.
The health benefit was from indoor usage not outdoor usage.

kbray in california
April 9, 2012 9:53 am

I see dead batteries….
“Aid agencies and governments have been seeking replacements for traditional cookstoves and fires… with ICs as one of the leading hopes… which have features like enhanced air flow and a battery-powered fan to burn wood and other fuel more cleanly.”
Battery-powered fans… ??? for poor people?. Who came up with that one? Batteries are expensive, short lived, a hassle, can explode if heated, and have a chemical waste issue. Someone has not thought this through thoroughly… Why not a battery powered electric hot plate then… that should be equally successful for them and “greener” too. sarc.

Andrew30
April 9, 2012 9:58 am

The Enviros should go to Trivandrum during Pongala and set these people straight.

Rice, coconut and jaggery are brought by women devotees along with round earthen pots for cooking. Women participating in the Pongala squat on roads, bylanes, footpaths and shop fronts in a radius of several kilometres around the temple to cook the mixture of rice, jaggery and coconut in earthen pots that is offered to the goddess seeking divine blessings.
The annual Pongala festival of Attukal Bhagavathi temple, has been entered in the Guinness Book of World Records as the largest congregation of women in the world. The festival draws over 2.5 million women on a single day in March to perform the Pongala ritual, and has been a center of attraction for devotees as well as tourists who visit Trivandrum during this season

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pongala
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noCZ4Gz3wxM
You have to see it to believe it. 2.5 million three-brick fires all over the roads, sidewalk, and parks in a city with a normal population of 750,000.

devijvers
April 9, 2012 9:59 am

These are rocket stoves:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_stove
It is true they burn much cleaner.

April 9, 2012 10:12 am

The people in those photographs above can’t afford ICs, never mind the ones that require batteries, because they can’t afford batteries either. What they need is electricity, pumped out from nice big generation plants.
Pointman

Luther Wu
April 9, 2012 10:18 am

Kaboom says:
April 9, 2012 at 9:38 am
I’d assume a centralized communal cooking area in villages with rocket stoves would be both the most efficient, lowest on soot and please lefty sensibilities at the same time.
__________________________
Communal cooking? Come on!
You live in a neighborhood, right?
You like the idea- you try it.

Luther Wu
April 9, 2012 10:19 am

@Kaboom- I phrased that last post incorrectly- I know that you were poking at the Lefties and their view of things- no intent to poke fun at you.

kbray in california
April 9, 2012 10:30 am

PS:
…Now a hand cranked squirrel cage blower…
to get the coals going… would fit this task.
But it still makes CO2…
and I thought the whole purpose was to stop additional CO2.!?
Apparently, if we don’t stop the CO2… according to Jim Hansen…. we are going to die.
Nuclear powered electric hot plate cookers will meet the specified parameters.
…and then we can all live in peace and harmony with perfect weather, just as mankind did before he mastered that evil destroyer of eden…..”FIRE.!”

April 9, 2012 10:32 am

It seems to me that we learned in the 1950s backyard incinerator debacle in Los Angeles County that the “black carbon” in the air was also known as “activated charcoal” that trapped the crap from the Fontana steel mills and the El Segundo Butadiene plants (for examples–there were a lot of others) and carried it to the ground instead of poisoning us.
Am I not remembering correctly?

kbray in california
April 9, 2012 10:36 am

Pointman says:
April 9, 2012 at 10:12 am
Amen to that.

kbray in california
April 9, 2012 11:00 am

We also need to ban candles. Why? CO2 of course.!
Flickering electric candles with mercury are OK, though.
Try forcing that one on billions of dogmatic devotees…
In wishing Peace and Love to the planet…
I’m going to go light a candle…
…and put more logs in the wood stove…
…and fire up the bar-bee-Q for lunch….
…being a “live food” Vegan would be so much easier, sigh…

April 9, 2012 11:01 am

Hugo says: Fragile ecosystems are being destroyed by this [cooking with wood or charcoal]
Hugo and others may be interested to know that hominids have been cooking with wood or charcoal for at least one million years and likely much longer than that.
http://westinstenv.org/sosf/2012/04/07/the-jaramillo-subchron-and-the-domestication-of-fire/
It might possibly be that “ecosystems” are not all that fragile, given that people have been burning them for one heck of a long long time.

tallbloke
April 9, 2012 11:06 am

As Marie Algorette might say:
“Let them eat cake”

Steve from Rockwood
April 9, 2012 11:14 am

Luther Wu says:
April 9, 2012 at 10:18 am
Kaboom says:
April 9, 2012 at 9:38 am
I’d assume a centralized communal cooking area in villages with rocket stoves would be both the most efficient, lowest on soot and please lefty sensibilities at the same time.
__________________________
Communal cooking? Come on!
You live in a neighborhood, right?
You like the idea- you try it.
——————————————–
I think Luther under estimates the competition for food.

polistra
April 9, 2012 11:17 am

Black soot a major contributor to global warming? Doesn’t soot cool the surface?
I guess that would make it a major negative contributor to warming, which is the same as a positive contributor by Orwellian math. (Rectified math, that is….)

April 9, 2012 11:24 am

“Peko Pe” (Ugandan “problem no”) top lit up draft pyrolitic gasifier cookstove Paal Wendelbo burns any dry biomass; the “concentrator disk” allows combustible gases and intake of secondary air to mix permitting larger cooking area than fan forced air stoves.
Lets locals burn everything from cashew shells, maize cobs, cow dung, straw, twig chips , etc. & no need for charcoal or wood if locally scarce.

cmarrou
April 9, 2012 11:49 am

One of the biggest sources of pollution in the Mexico City area is propane from stoves with badly-fitted connectors. No matter what it is, it can be a problem if there’s enough of it and humans can get their hands on it.

April 9, 2012 12:15 pm

Communal cooking. Like Sardi’s.

thelastdemocrat
April 9, 2012 12:29 pm

solar oven
http://solarovens.net/
a one-time cost. can be used, with education, to purify water to potability.
ideally, an acceptable, well-performing model would be produced ‘locally,’ rather than coming from China.
A lot of the locales that depend on burning wood have what it takes to adapt to this style of cooking: people, time, and a diet that is not overly dependent on foods like seafood and mayo that spoil if the heat is not quite hot enough.
-someone noted that humans have been burning wood as a heat and cooking source for eons. Yes. We have also denuded great portions of land.

1 2 3 4