[Stoves] Another review paper: Impact of household air pollution on human health

[Ronal Larson]

Stove list and ccs:

	This paper looks like  fine paper - but almost no connection to charcoal-making stoves. I cannot recommend it for this list - except possibly Julien - as the authors are largely from Bangladesh.

	Nikhil’s last sentence is pertinent - but I am asking the list for guidance.  Not yet me giving any guidance.  Only asking a question.

	And I am just starting on this question - can charcoal-making stoves that make money for their users be funded for climate related reasons?  CDR. 

Ron

> On Jan 2, 2020, at 7:11 AM, Nikhil Desai <pienergy2008 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Ron, list: 
> 
> Since we are reviewing the reviews, I suggest this Review Paper: Impact of household air pollution on human health: Source identification and systematic management approach. <https://www.academia.edu/40842770/Impact_of_household_air_pollution_USM_affliation_?> (Springer Nature Applied Sciences April 2019; the link is at academia.edu <http://academia.edu/>.) 
> 
> This paper traverses back from Kirk Smith definition of HAP - PM2.5 from solid fuels, no matter that for his DALY computations he did not have an iota worth of recorded evidence on emissions, exposures, or diseases - to what used to be called IAP - Indoor Air Pollution. 
> 
> To borrow from Kirk Smith et al (2000) AREE paper, "The policy implications of definitions are profound." 
> 
> Kirk Smith assumed solid fuels to be dirty by definition, and LPG/gas/electricity clean by definition. A lucrative advocacy for "clean cooking" followed, not that any was needed. Energy policy practitioners know what the problem is what the solutions are; aDALY quantifications are poppycock and "no stacking" vigilantism is not cost-effective. 
> 
> For you and other designers/promoters of contextual biomass technologies, the policy implications of redefining HAP as what used to be called IAP are in this paper's conclusion: "To improve their health,as well as the whole household environment, it is necessary to reduce the sources of HAP while also alleviating its adverse health effects. Although household pollutants are quite complex and vary widely in their concentrations,HAP is a modifiable risk factor with known management strategies that can be used to lessen its effects on the environment and human health. However, successful management strategies require robust information pertaining to the problem, and this information must be generated from diverse settings."
> 
> The paper is "academic" in the pejorative sense I have been using. Still, it is refreshing that the authors bring up the topic of "known management strategies". 
> 
> Yes, last 50 years of professional practice - check out AWMA, for example - has taught us how to do air quality management. Neither fuel bans nor magic stoves are a universal answer. But if we define our problem as "contribution to air pollution exposure control," we would shed the WBT protocols and ISO silliness, and seek to collaborate with practitioners of the art of air quality management. 
> 
> Yes, commercial char ovens are a promising idea when the land and feedstock are available at low cost and a bankable business proposal can be made. Please give us some insight and help in that direction. 
> 
> N
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Nikhil Desai
> (US +1) 202 568 5831
> Skype: nikhildesai888
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20200102/7eb54ad3/attachment.html>