[Stoves] News: Cooking pollution by propaganda - GACCing India

[Darpan Das]

Dear All

This is my first post in the group. I am a PhD student working on the
emission factor and source profile development from coal stoves.

I feel emissions from coal stoves is a major problem as described in the
article shared in the thread above.

Coal, as a fuel is used widely for domestic cooking in many regions of
India, which contributes significantly to the Carbon Monoxide (CO) and
PM2.5 levels (both indoor and ambient). Chandrapur, Maharashtra (India)
which has been identified by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) as
one of the most critically polluted cities of India (CPCB, 2016) is one
such area where coal stoves have created problem to the air quality.

According to the Environmental Performance Index Report, 2014 prepared by
Yale University, the number of people using solid fuel as cooking fuel has
increased greatly. The absolute number of people using solid fuels (biomass
and coal) for home cooking and heating has roughly doubled from 333 to 646
million from 1989 to 2010 and this particular number is expected to rise
substantially by the year 2020. According to Census, 2011 data more than
3.5 million people still use coal as their primary fuel for cooking. As per
provincial reports of Census of India, population of Chandrapur city in
2011 was 3,21,036. The estimated use of Coal in Chandrapur is in
approximately 11,769 households.


Problem of coal cook stoves in 21st century is reality!!

Darpan

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 12:29 AM, Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> There is an item in the Times of India -  Cooking emissions an overlooked
> contributor to air pollution
> <http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/cooking-emissions-an-overlooked-contributor-to-air-pollution/articleshow/56224624.cms> 28
> December 2016,
>
> Supposedly a news item (from Kolkata), not an opinion piece, it claims,
>
> "the effect of air pollution is different in Eastern India as compared to
> the rest of the country, where millions still depend on coal-based heating
> and cooking medium."
>
> ** I am willing to grant that PICs from traditional ("uncontrolled",
> disputable) combustion of coals have different effects than from other
> sources, but I doubt there is much exposure measurement or dose response
> studies showing different patterns of disease. Besides, I think Jharkhand
> is the only state in Eastern India (if it can be considered Eastern) that
> has sizable residential use for coal. **
>
>
> "Biomass burning not only causes indoor pollution but destroys a key
> resource for soil rejuvenation."
>
> ** Again, I grant the theory but I doubt there is enough evidence that can
> be generalizable over large varieties of Indian agro-climatic zones and
> soils. Looks like hype. **
>
> "According to The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), nearly 40% of
> India's air pollution comes from domestic fuel burning. For decades,
> researchers, experts and NGOs have looked for ways of convincing people to
> switch to more efficient and cost effective cooking methods."
>
> ** Oh, yeah? There is no citation, but I doubt there can be any about a
> fairly precise "nearly 40% of India's air pollution". Pollution is neither
> emissions nor concentrations - which are poorly measured - but exposures
> (of different intensities and durations), for which there are proxies, few
> direct measurements for ambient air. I appeal to the list members in India
> to correct me if necessary. **
>
> Then the usual litany of "cancer, pneumonia, heart disease" (who knows,
> maybe impotence and infertility, neo-Malthusians would celebrate with
> champagne CO2) and SLCPs, deforestation, rivers of tears, etc., after which
> I discover
>
> "Earlier this year, an online database established with support from the
> Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves, an initiative by the United Nation
> Foundation
> <http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/United-Nation-Foundation>,
> began tracking the impact of household energy consumption on more than 640
> districts across India. The data showed that almost *30% of the country's
> outdoor air pollution is due to household energy combustion*. In some
> districts, household air pollution contributes over half of outdoor air
> pollution, making it clear that reducing outdoor air pollution requires
> addressing indoor air pollution as well."
>
> ** Oh, really. I mean, what blather. There is no conceivable way to
> monitor the quantity and quality of fuel use in households across India.
> Assumptions on these by region and household types are not empirically
> verifiable, nor the assumptions on average emission factors.
>
> Also, air quality data may be available from satellites but has no
> conceivable link to exposures. It is exposure that determines pollution,
> not emissions and concentrations, so the entire claim about "30% of the
> country's outdoor air pollution" is baseless. ***
>
> Of course, every such story has to end with the CEO of GACC, who says,
>
> ""Household air pollution from cooking is a leading cause of illness and
> death in India. Switching millions of people from cooking with solid fuels
> to consistent use of clean fuels could deliver huge benefits to health and
> the environment, especially air quality,"
>
> *** This is either deceit or nonsense. The trouble is NOT with "solid
> fuels" -- "pollution" doesn't reside in solid fuels, it is just produced by
> poor combustion devices and practices, and emissions don't matter,
> exposures do. Nor is "consistent use of clean fuels" some panacea, even if
> users adopted it en masse. (She can't just wish away "stacking"; she needs
> "consistent use" only to show off "benefits" in "health" or "climate" as
> cooked up by WHO/EPA exercise. Make no mistake, this is a crusade against
> solid fuels.) ***
>
>
> What is to be done? Academically inclined friends - caught in the cult of
> peer-reviewed journals that is increasingly corrupted by cite-o-logy - ask,
> "How can one do better? Surely all this effort is incremental; the theory
> is correct, but data quality needs improvements. We will eventually get to
> better data and better models."
>
> That is similar to the belief in biomass stoves -  "We will eventually get
> to better stoves, improvements are needed, just point to protocol errors
> and design problems."
>
> Oh maybe in 30 more years of this list. Unless these TLUDs take 10% of the
> market in five years, now or by 2025.
>
> However, GACC propaganda has nothing to do with the design and promotion
> of clean biomass stoves, which - as Cecil and ESMAP Indonesia project
> showed us - can only be done "contextually". Like politics, most chemistry
> for biomass combustion is local -- fuel composition, combustion practices,
> air chemistry, and of course dependent on dwelling design and local
> ecosystems.
>
> Rather, the theory is wrong. We are boxed in the "box paradigm" of USEPA,
> WHO/BAMG and ISO/IWA. And the GoBbleDygook of IHME. ***
>
> Nikhil
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stoves mailing list
>
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_
> lists.bioenergylists.org
>
> for more Biomass Cooking Stoves,  News and Information see our web site:
> http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170107/23297802/attachment.html>