STANDARD METHODS FOR MONITORING INDOOR AIR POLLUTION TO EVALUATE IMPROVED STOVE

PROGRAMS:

PLANS, PROTOCOLS, & PROGRESS

R.D. Edwards1,2, K. Naumoff2, O. Masera3, C. Chengappa4, K. Dutta5, R. Grinnell6, P. Serrano3, S. Rastogi4, C.

Armendáriz3, D. O’Neal6, K.R. Smith2

1University of California at Irvine, 2University of California at Berkeley, 3GIRA Mexico, 4Development Alternatives, New Delhi, 5ARTI Pune 6HELPS,

Guatemala City.

Why do we need standard methods?

Evaluation of improved stove programs is needed so that programs & stoves can be better designed & programs better targeted.

• One problem with past Improved Stove ProgramsLittle systematic evaluation of stove impact in actually reducing IAP.

• Why?Lack of accessible equipment & methods for stove disseminators.

To address this problem,We have developed a training program & inexpensive PM & CO monitors as well as stove performance test protocols that stove disseminators can use to evaluate their stove programs.

IAP Training & Monitoring Package

• Reference Materials– Survey Design & Sample Size Calculation– Methods for Reducing the COV– QA/QC

• Equipment– UCB Particle Monitor– UCB Software & Computer Cables– HOBO CO Monitor– HOBO Software– CO Dosimeter Tubes & Caps– IAP Monitoring Data Sheets– Sampling Questionnaires– Stove Performance Test Protocols & Equipment– Field Supplies (batteries, voltmeter, hammer, flashlight, nails, tape, etc)

• Internet Site– http://ehs.sph.berkeley.edu/hem/page.asp?id=1

UCB Particle MonitorIonization Chamber

Photoelectric Chamber

Challenges• Calibration period• Dealing with large data flows• Battery life & loss of connection• Smooth integration of software/firmware/hardware

CO Monitoring:

HOBO Monitor & Dosimeter Tubes

•Electrochemical Sensor•Continuous Sample•Passive•Area Sampler

•Chemical Reaction•Integrated Sample•Passive•Personal or area sampler

Stove Performance Tests

• Water Boiling Test

Single Pot StoveTwo Pot Stove

(Development Alternative Stove Models)

• Kitchen Performance Test

Protocols & Training by Rob Bailis

Progress Mexico (GIRA):Monitoring in a Traditional & an Improved Stove HH

Monitors

Fires

Smoke Evidence

Patsari improved stove

Smoke levels over 24 hours, traditional HH

-200

20406080

100120140160180

12:3

6

15:2

3

18:1

0

20:5

7

23:4

4

2:31

5:18

8:05

10:5

2

13:3

9

16:2

6

19:1

3

22:0

0

0:47

3:34

6:21

9:08

11:5

5

Time

mas

s (p

pm

an

d m

g/m

3)

UCB Particle Monitor HOBO COAlthough HOBO-CO and UCB-PM measure different pollutants, CO and small particles, both show the patterns of stove usage in the home.

Smoke levels over 24 hr, Patsari improved stove HH

Patsari

-202468

101214

12

:36

16

:12

19

:48

23

:24

3:0

0

6:3

6

10

:12

13

:48

17

:24

21

:00

0:3

6

4:1

2

7:4

8

11:2

4

Time

ma

ss

(p

pm

an

d m

g/m

3)

UCB particle monitor HOBO CO

Note the big difference in the vertical axis scale from the last slide.

Results from preliminary data:Percentage reduction

The Patsari stove shows a reduction in average levels & in the peak levels of smoke & CO in the home.

Average Maximum levelsHOBO CO Open fire (12) 7.5 82.4ppm Patsari improved stove (2) 1.2 5.9

Percent reduction 83.7 92.9UCB particle monitor Open fire (12) 1.2 65.4mg/m3 Patsari improved stove (2) 0.1 8.1

Percent reduction 92.0 87.7

Comparison to other research relying on gravimetric methods

GIRA’s estimates agree well with the Kirk Smith group’s PM measurements in Guatemala including:

• Before & after intervention PM measurements in a much

larger sample (n=126) adjusted for differences in the groups at baseline as well as for seasonal/time effects; &

• Gravimetric PM1.0 measurements.

• Results show a similar large reduction (92%) in kitchen PM1.0 concentrations in traditional compared to improved stove homes.

Source: McCracken et al ISEA 2004

CO & PM correlate well in preliminary data from ten Mexican households

UCB Particle Monitor and HOBO CO Correlations

y = 5.8206x + 0.4654

R2 = 0.9881

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

UCB Particle Monitor mg/m3

HO

BO

CO

pp

m

48-h mean concentrations

Next Steps: Time Activity Supplementary Package

• Considering a time/activity package for groups wishing to do exposure assessments without personal monitoring.

• Preliminary tests with UCB Locator show good results, with 93% accuracy rate in field trials as measured against direct observation.

• Development team led by Gian Allen-Piccolo.

Next Steps:Additional Training Resources

• Provide a supplementary package for groups wishing to do more detailed studies with the kits, including personal monitoring & ventilation measurements.

• The Berkeley Center for Entrepreneurship in International Health and Development will be conducting training & providing kits for stoveprograms starting 2005. (http://ceihd.berkeley.edu)

• HEM website will have all the protocols, samplequestionnaires, calculation spread sheets, info on design & sample size methods, QA/QC, etc, in 2005.

Under the same Shell Foundation grant, the University of Liverpool is developing standard methods for assessing changes in child & mothers' health.

Conclusion

Thanks to our NGO Partners… Appropriate Rural Technology Institute &Development Alternatives, IndiaGIRA, MexicoHELPS, Guatemala

And to our generous funder, The Shell Foundation.