Options
In-kitchen aerosol exposure in twelve cities across the globe
Date Issued
01-04-2022
Author(s)
Kumar, Prashant
Hama, Sarkawt
Abbass, Rana Alaa
Nogueira, Thiago
Brand, Veronika S.
Wu, Huai Wen
Abulude, Francis Olawale
Adelodun, Adedeji A.
Anand, Partibha
Andrade, Maria de Fatima
Apondo, William
Asfaw, Araya
Aziz, Kosar Hama
Cao, Shi Jie
El-Gendy, Ahmed
Indu, Gopika
Kehbila, Anderson Gwanyebit
Ketzel, Matthias
Khare, Mukesh
Kota, Sri Harsha
Mamo, Tesfaye
Manyozo, Steve
Martinez, Jenny
McNabola, Aonghus
Morawska, Lidia
Mustafa, Fryad
Muula, Adamson S.
Nahian, Samiha
Nardocci, Adelaide Cassia
Nelson, William
Ngowi, Aiwerasia V.
Njoroge, George
Olaya, Yris
Omer, Khalid
Osano, Philip
Sarkar Pavel, Md Riad
Salam, Abdus
Santos, Erik Luan Costa
Sitati, Cynthia
Indian Institute of Technology, Madras
Abstract
Poor ventilation and polluting cooking fuels in low-income homes cause high exposure, yet relevant global studies are limited. We assessed exposure to in-kitchen particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10) employing similar instrumentation in 60 low-income homes across 12 cities: Dhaka (Bangladesh); Chennai (India); Nanjing (China); Medellín (Colombia); São Paulo (Brazil); Cairo (Egypt); Sulaymaniyah (Iraq); Addis Ababa (Ethiopia); Akure (Nigeria); Blantyre (Malawi); Dar-es-Salaam (Tanzania) and Nairobi (Kenya). Exposure profiles of kitchen occupants showed that fuel, kitchen volume, cooking type and ventilation were the most prominent factors affecting in-kitchen exposure. Different cuisines resulted in varying cooking durations and disproportional exposures. Occupants in Dhaka, Nanjing, Dar-es-Salaam and Nairobi spent > 40% of their cooking time frying (the highest particle emitting cooking activity) compared with ∼ 68% of time spent boiling/stewing in Cairo, Sulaymaniyah and Akure. The highest average PM2.5 (PM10) concentrations were in Dhaka 185 ± 48 (220 ± 58) μg m−3 owing to small kitchen volume, extensive frying and prolonged cooking compared with the lowest in Medellín 10 ± 3 (14 ± 2) μg m−3. Dual ventilation (mechanical and natural) in Chennai, Cairo and Sulaymaniyah reduced average in-kitchen PM2.5 and PM10 by 2.3- and 1.8-times compared with natural ventilation (open doors) in Addis Ababa, Dar-es-Salam and Nairobi. Using charcoal during cooking (Addis Ababa, Blantyre and Nairobi) increased PM2.5 levels by 1.3- and 3.1-times compared with using natural gas (Nanjing, Medellin and Cairo) and LPG (Chennai, Sao Paulo and Sulaymaniyah), respectively. Smaller-volume kitchens (<15 m3; Dhaka and Nanjing) increased cooking exposure compared with their larger-volume counterparts (Medellin, Cairo and Sulaymaniyah). Potential exposure doses were highest for Asian, followed by African, Middle-eastern and South American homes. We recommend increased cooking exhaust extraction, cleaner fuels, awareness on improved cooking practices and minimising passive occupancy in kitchens to mitigate harmful cooking emissions.
Volume
162