Cooking with Woodfired Cookstoves in Guatemala

Research studies on wood smoke and other air pollution.

Cooking with Woodfired Cookstoves in Guatemala

Postby Wilberforce » Tue Mar 12, 2013 7:04 pm

Longitudinal Relationship between Personal CO and Personal PM2.5 among Women
Cooking with Woodfired Cookstoves in Guatemala
McCracken et al ... #abstract0
Household air pollution (HAP) due to solid fuel use is a major public health threat in low-income countries. Most health effects are thought to be related to exposure to the fine particulate matter (PM) component of HAP, but it is currently impractical to measure personal exposure to PM in large studies. Carbon monoxide (CO) has been shown in cross-sectional analyses to be a reliable surrogate for particles<2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5) in kitchens where wood-burning cookfires are a dominant source, but it is unknown whether a similar PM2.5-CO relationship exists for personal exposures longitudinally. We repeatedly measured (216 measures, 116 women) 24-hour personal PM2.5 (median [IQR] = 0.11 [0.05, 0.21] mg/m3) and CO (median [IQR] = 1.18 [0.50, 2.37] mg/m3) among women cooking over open woodfires or chimney woodstoves in Guatemala. Pollution measures were natural-log transformed for analyses. In linear mixed effects models with random subject intercepts, we found that personal CO explained 78% of between-subject variance in personal PM2.5. We did not see a difference in slope by stove type. This work provides evidence that in settings where there is a dominant source of biomass combustion, repeated measures of personal CO can be used as a reliable surrogate for an individual's PM2.5 exposure. This finding has important implications for the feasibility of reliably estimating long-term (months to years) PM2.5 exposure in large-scale epidemiological and intervention studies of HAP.

Contribution to PM2.5 from domestic wood burning in a small community in Sweden
Peter Molnár and Gerd Sallsten ... C3EM30864B
Biomass burning for domestic heating has increased in many countries with cold climates in recent years. This paper presents and compares two ways of estimating the contribution of particulate matter (PM2.5) to ambient air from local domestic wood burning, using daily stationary parallel PM2.5 measurements in a wood-burning area and at a reference location. In the first method (based on air mass back trajectories), daily gravimetric PM2.5 mass differences were compared between the two stations for days with low contributions from regional sources. In the second method, 28 filters from each location were chemically analysed, and source contributions were calculated using positive matrix factorisation (PMF). The trajectory method estimated the extra local contribution from domestic wood burning in the wood-burning area to be 0.7–1.1 µg m-3, while the PMF method gave a contribution of 0.64 µg m-3. With the PMF method, the total contribution to ambient air from local domestic wood burning was estimated to be 25% of the total PM2.5 mass. The estimated mass contribution using the trajectory method gave a result similar to that of the PMF method, and the method can therefore be a time- and cost-effective first step, especially when no chemical analysis is possible.
• The Surgeon General has determined that there is no safe level of exposure to ambient smoke!

• If you smell even a subtle odor of smoke, you are being exposed to poisonous and carcinogenic chemical compounds!

• Even a brief exposure to smoke raises blood pressure, (no matter what your state of health) and can cause blood clotting, stroke, or heart attack in vulnerable people. Even children experience elevated blood pressure when exposed to smoke!

• Since smoke drastically weakens the lungs' immune system, avoiding smoke is one of the best ways to prevent colds, flu, bronchitis, or risk of an even more serious respiratory illness, such as pneumonia or tuberculosis! Does your child have the flu? Chances are they have been exposed to ambient smoke!
User avatar
Posts: 6098
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:36 pm
Location: USA

Return to Particle Pollution Research

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests