Are cleaner cooking solutions clean enough? A systematic review and meta-analysis of particulate and carbon monoxide concentrations and exposures

Author:

Pope DanielORCID,Johnson Michael,Fleeman Nigel,Jagoe Kirstie,Duarte RuiORCID,Maden Michelle,Ludolph Ramona,Bruce Nigel,Shupler Matthew,Adair-Rohani Heather,Lewis Jessica

Abstract

Abstract Globally, approximately 3 billion primarily cook using inefficient and poorly vented combustion devices, leading to unsafe levels of household air pollution (HAP) in and around the home. Such exposures contribute to nearly 4 million deaths annually (WHO 2018a, 2018b ). Characterizing the effectiveness of interventions for reducing HAP concentration and exposure is critical for informing policy and programmatic decision-making on which cooking solutions yield the greatest health benefits. This review synthesizes evidence of in-field measurements from four cleaner cooking technologies and three clean fuels, using field studies aimed at reducing HAP concentration and personal exposure to health damaging pollutants (particulate matter (PM2.5) and carbon monoxide (CO)). Fifty studies from Africa, Asia, South and Latin America, provided 168 estimates synthesized through meta-analysis. For PM2.5 kitchen concentrations, burning biomass more cleanly through improved combustion stoves (ICS) with (n = 29; 63% reduction) or without (n = 12; 52%) venting (through flue or chimney) and through forced-draft combustion (n = 9; 50%) was less effective than cooking with clean fuels including ethanol (n = 4; 83%), liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) (n = 11; 83%) and electricity (n = 6; 86%). Only studies of clean fuels consistently achieved post-intervention kitchen PM2.5 levels at or below the health-based WHO interim target level 1 (WHO-IT1) of 35 μg m−3. None of the advanced combustion stoves (gasifiers) achieved WHO-IT1, although no evidence was available for pellet fuelled stoves. For personal exposure to PM2.5, none of the ICS (n = 11) were close to WHO-IT1 whereas 75% (n = 6 of 8) of LPG interventions were at or below WHO-IT1. Similar patterns were observed for CO, although most post-intervention levels achieved the WHO 24 h guideline level. While clean cooking fuel interventions (LPG, electric) significantly reduce kitchen concentrations and personal exposure to PM2.5 in household settings, stove stacking and background levels of ambient air pollution, have likely prevented most clean fuel interventions from approaching WHO-IT1. In order to maximize health gains, a wholistic approach jointly targeting ambient and HAP should be followed in lower-and-middle income countries.

Funder

World Health Organization

Publisher

IOP Publishing

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,General Environmental Science,Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3