[Stoves] The Economist: Wood-burning stoves, the picturesque polluters

[Nikhil Desai]

Andrew:

On the red-lined text in your reply (if colors come through):

1. In Kirk Smith/WHO schema of HAP BOD, not only is AAP not included, nor
is any other source of HAP other than solid fuels combustion. (And arguably
not even that. There is no "build up" based on measurements solid fuel
quality and quantity, emission rates during cooking periods, net of
ventilation, and ingestion, associated with disease incidence. Nothing.
Slap a number for PM2.5 daily concentration for all the households assumed
to cook with solid fuels, and compute Relative Risk for particular
diseases. Voila! People are killed!!)

So, your view that " eliminating any one of the sources is never going to
eliminate the problem" is all the more relevant in the context of cooking
fuels and technologies.

To put bluntly, "truly health protective" is meaningless jargon.

In turn, we need to keep in mind that there is no single measure of
pollution - PM2.5 is an indicator, and chemical/size composition is key, to
the extent causality is established - and that there is no single "the
problem" - frequency, intensity, duration of disease vary, and vary also by
age, sex, nutritional and health conditions as well as the available
treatment alternatives.

To be blunt, a simplistic notion that "reduce pollution emission rates,
solve the problem" is deceit. Gas and electricity sell without being
branded as oils of different snakes

2. At least according to Tony Cox's review earlier this year, the case for
PM2.5 causal link to disease is yet untenable. There are all sorts of
claims about particulates getting in the blood. How they are "linked" to
disease and disabilities remains a matter of faith and persuasion. In any
event, Smith/WHO don't have data on causes of death or duration of
disability in most of the developing world.

It's all a fancy imaginary cheesecake with imaginary Cognac vats. Enjoy!!

There is more literature on diesel emissions, but rather pathetic; in
India, for instance, diesel emission factors for different kinds of engines
- cars, trucks, captive power generators from home to industrial users,
stationary motive power - according to location and operating factors -
just don't exist. (This problem is well-known in energy community, but
environmental health types cook up data and deaths at will.)

We just know very little of how to reduce the air pollution diseases in the
developing world - from AAP or HAP.  That " others are not so fortunate"
applies to lower-income households in UK as well as in the developing world
- in particular, regions that have severe winters and poor housing
conditions.

3.  Now, I have some definition of "contextually defined levels" of "
significant improvements in air quality". Will write more in a paper I have
started but, two elements:

1) Locally enforced or enforceable standards (ambient at least, indoor if
any such exist);
2) Some indicators of potential improvement and means (affordability,
logistics of the supply chains of fuel, equipment, services); and
3) Some alternatives for emergency exposure management.

More later. Views welcome.

Nikhil


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nikhil Desai
(US +1) 202 568 5831
*Skype: nikhildesai888*


On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 7:04 AM, Andrew Heggie <aj.heggie at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 at 23:20, Nikhil Desai <pienergy2008 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Re:  "also eliminate other sources in the local environment."
> >
> > a) Some of it is natural; b) if you drop the equitoxicity assumption,
> these % shares are irrelevant. Maybe it is more important to drop BC from
> diesel than to shut down wood stoves for home heating.
>
> Firstly as I said it is not relevant to those who have to cook with wood,
> there are alternatives available in UK and the contribution to the cost of
> heat overall is negligible compared with the effect in an already
> polluted urban area, others are not so fortunate.
>
> I have on board that all particulates are not equally as damaging but so
> far have no reason to believe particulates from wood smoke are any less
> damaging than those from diesel exhausts.
> >
> > Remember, in the Kirk Smith worldview, it is only the PM2.5 from solid
> fuels that HAP premature deaths are attributed to.
>
> Yes because it is Household Air Pollution he is considering not ambient
> air next to a highway.
> >
> > That there is no observed quantity and duration of exposures to just HAP
> PM2.5 is one issue with GBD "estimates". But more fundamentally, how can
> one eliminate non-fuel PM2.5 - not just from tobacco smoke, a known
> carcinogen, but also all the emissions from foods, livestock management,
> "natural" dust - and even PM5 and PM10, which includes pollen and such -
> and achieve a target reduction in "dosage"?
>
> Part of the "natural" dust is Aspergillus spores from the fungal breakdown
> of biomass and these are cited as causing lung disorders and this was part
> of my point, eliminating any one of the sources is never going to
> eliminate the problem.
>
>
> <snip>
>
> The only objective of a clean cookstove - like any other combustion device
> with organic fuels - is a significant improve in air quality, toward some
> contextually defined levels.
>
> I agree but  getting to know  the "contextually defined levels" seems to
> be a problem
>
> Andrew
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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_list
> s.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/20180907/88ee6321/attachment.html>