[Stoves] News: National Geographic on promotion of gas stoves over improved woodstoves - in Guatemala

Sat Aug 19 11:56:48 CDT 2017

Dear Nikhil

One might also say, after this: "In Guatemala, locally made cookstoves are helping combat toxic smoke—but economics and tradition keep many people from using them" and add 'common sense'.

The 'good' stove can't perform the tasks required in the kitchen. Why is this a surprise. ‎Cecil pointed out that in Central Java they use what he called a 'Party stove' about 20 times a year. It is simple not reasonable to expect everyone to use a single stove all the time.

One of the issues I have with the WHO 'targets' is that the infrequent use of a much more polluting stove is impossible to factor into the exposure model. ‎Where does the health danger lie? In the average exposure over 24 hrs? High exposure for more than 20 minutes? When a 'dirtier' stove is used, do people leave the room?

There may indeed by a solid fuel crisis, in that the inefficient use of it and the leakage of smoke into the living area is a major issue around the world. The solution in the medium term is to make far more efficient and cleaner burning stoves to replace them.

This is a matter of urgency. The world will be far too occupied in the short term with war, financial and political collapse to worr‎y about subsidizing LPG in rural Guatemala.

I liked the bit about smuggling rare woods mixed in firewood. That means there is real enforcement taking place to stop the harvesting of protected species.

I am not sure about firewood being a major cause of deforestation there. The clearing of forest for fields, which run way up the hills, seems more likely to be the biggest contributor. ‎There is a lot of pressure to create more farmland. They certainly farm steeper slopes than in Swaziland, a country otherwise identical to look at.

Perhaps we can just create two good stoves of different sizes and all the alarm will fade away.

Cheap, easy.
Crispin

 By Michelle Nijhuis, August 14, 2017. National Geographic

A nice piece of "Crisis Reporting", after WHO declared solid fuels use as a global crisis. NatGeo will go much farther in moving minds than GBD and HAPIT.

This story is really about "stacking" and dose-response mechanisms.

"Their efficient woodstove, a knee-high concrete cylinder donated by an aid group called StoveTeam International, is too small to support the tamale pot. So, as she does about once a month, Perez has fired up the old wood-burning stove, a crumbling, chimney-less brick ruin whose smoke pours directly into the unventilated kitchen. Everyone notices the smoke, but it’s a familiar annoyance—and compared with the daily challenge of affording food and fuel, it’s a minor one."

So what does the UC-Berkeley research do - instead of putting the focus on "efficient woodstove" being only one type and size, going wild that "the indoor air pollution was still far above guidelines set by the World Health Organization."

Not the general guidelines but the particular guidelines for Household Fuel Combustion, influenced heavily by the Reviews and blessings of UC-Berkeley team in the first place. As part of the war against solid fuels, which they (and WHO) DEFINE to be "dirty".

There is the usual reciting of globalization mantras:

"Wood-burning household fires and inefficient stoves cause broader suffering, too. The firewood trade promotes deforestation and also provides cover for timber smuggling, since wood from rare trees can be hidden among logs from more common species. The smoke from cook fires pollutes the air outdoors as well as indoors, especially in cities. And as a major source of black carbon—a sunlight-absorbing pollutant—the world’s billions of household fires are also thought to be accelerating the effects of climate change, speeding the disruption of monsoon cycles and the melting of glaciers."

But the GACC CEO's frankness is admirable -

"Muthiah and other stove experts emphasize that there is no single ideal stove or ideal fuel, as every household, every community, and every culture has different needs and priorities: a stove designed for rural Guatemala may well be completely impractical in Nairobi."

If so, why bother with ISO "international standards" exercise?

I for one don't think an international research team is warranted to "determine whether the use of gas stoves improves air quality and the health of children." Of course it does that and much else. It is the precise quantification, and its applicability in quantitative forecasting, that I find to be morally repugnant and waste of public money in creating unproductive research jobs.

"Thompson and a network of collaborators are now expanding this research to India, Peru, and Rwanda, studying how gas-stove adoption—and associated improvements in household air quality—affects the health of mothers and children."

Next -- HAPIT for cats? (I loved this attached picture).

N

Three Billion People Cook Over Open Fires With Deadly Consequences<http://www.nationalgeographic.com/photography/proof/2017/07/guatemala-cook-stoves/>: In Guatemala, locally made cookstoves are helping combat toxic smoke—but economics and tradition keep many people from using them. By Michelle Nijhuis, August 14, 2017. National Geographic
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170819/575b454e/attachment.html>