Transcript PilotPhase-Final-June 13

PILOT PHASE
(10-2009 to Present)
Baseline Data
outdoor
Indoor
Technology Testing
Deployment of Forced
Draft Stoves
: 10-2009 to 06-2011
: 11-2009 to 10-2010
: 06-2010 to 07-2010
: 02-2010 to 06-2010
Experiment Concept
10 km
10 km
Pilot Phase
MISR
NASAAERONET
MODIS
SURYA
Village Center Observatory
Traffic-Sample site
A Grand Climate and Health Intervention Experiment
Technology assessment, dissemination and
documentation of emission reduction in the pilot phase
The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), New Delhi, India
Cooking technology options
LPG
Biogas
Kerosene Stove
Biomass based
Improved Cook stove
Biomass based Mud Stove
Focus: Biomass based IC
Even in 2030, 632 million people in
•
Natural Draft
India will depend on biomass for
energy
In-situ production and consumption
•
–
–
Mostly single burner
–
Enhanced “free convection”- grates,
design
No expensive LPG like supply
chains
–
Mostly gasification through air pores
–
Price: 1100-2500
Forced draft
–
Only single burner
–
Air “forced” into stove chamber using fan
Model/
parameter
Thermal
efficienc
y (%age)
Reduct
ion in
PM2.5
(%age)
Reductio
n in CO
(%-age)
Reduction in
Black
Carbon (%age)
Natural
draft
20 - 28
20-39
26-34
22-55
Forced
draft
30-40
42-55
31-48
49-85
SMF battery power pack,
Gasification
–
Top loading- Processed Fuel, Pellets, rice:
$60-80
Strengths
• 10% – 25% increase in thermal efficiency
• PM 2.5 emissions reduction by a factor of 2-4
Weakness
•
Field Vs Lab: Performance differential
•
None of the commercial stoves meet WHO stipulated
PM2.5 levels
Surya
Transition
Improved Cookstove
Mud Stove
Baseline
monitoring
Testing
Development and
customization
 Surya dovetailed an ongoing TERI DST
Project which
 Tested 11 cookstove models
 Established the advantages of
Forced Draft Stoves
 Reduced cost by 40%
Stove
dissemination,
capacity building
Post
dissemination
monitoring
 Surya dovetailed an ongoing TERI DST
Project which
 Identified and trained village
volunteers
 Optimized the right mix of fuels for
production of pellets
 Facilitated the setting up of
entrepreneurship based pelletization
and stove dissemination
Surya-Pilot phase
Desired Outputs
Resources needed
(RN)
Resources
mobilized and
spent
(RM& S)
Activities
undertaken till
date
Contribution of activities
undertaken to outputs
Pilot testing of
different cook stoves
models in the Lab
In forced draft stoves emission
reduction ranges 60-80%
Additional
resources required
(ARR)
Technology
Identification of
appropriate
technology options
for meeting cooking
energy needs
Pilot testing of
different cook stoves
in the field
Customized forced
draft stove- two pot
Comparative
assessment of biomass
stove technologies
focusing both on
emission and thermal
efficiency
characteristics
Dissemination of 10
000 forced draft
stoves
Dissemination of close
to 500 forced draft
stoves
Customized forced
draft stove-single
pot
For Natural draft stoves it is
substantially less
Thermal efficiency and fuel savings
are much higher in forced draft
stoves
Energy for a Sustainable Future the Secretary-General’s Advisory Group On Energy And Climate Change (AGECC) Summary Report And Recommendations, 28 April 2010, New York
Baseline monitoring : Cooking a major
source of high BC Concentrations
Baseline monitoring : BC Indoor
concentrations drive outdoor
concentrations
TERI Stove development under DST
Project
• Patented Model
• Cost- 2000
– 50% lesser price than comparable
commercial model
• Dual Charging facility- Grid+ Solar
• Separate Power pack
• Dissemination to 50 households
TERI Stove development under DST
(Indian Government) Project
Problems with existing single pot models
• Requirement of processed wood•
Expensive pellets , Manual chopping
•
Men non inclined, Physically stressful for women
• Continuous feeding
• Single pot stove- insufficient for big family
• Traditional Roti baking
• Fuel incompatibility- inability to use non monetized
biomass
• Hence development of a twin pot forced draft model
Surya : Stove dissemination and
capacity building
• Close to 500 stoves –
village saturation
• Another 500 stoves under
the DST project
– Full Subsidy
– Partial Subsidy
– Full Cost
• Training and awareness
campaign
Forced draft better than natural draft
Conclusions
Forced draft
stoves reduce
BC
concentrations
by 70%-80%
Cooking with
solid biomass
fuels-major
source of BC
over IGP
Peak values early morning
and evening
hours 100 μg
m-3 are a factor
of 5 to 20 times
larger than day
time values
Fossil fuel
combustion has
significant
influence on BC
conc.
Reduction in
short lived
pollutants by
introduction of
efficient
technologies
A Grand Climate and Health Intervention Experiment
Wireless System for High Spatial Resolution Data
Collection
N. Ramanathan
UCLA & NexLeaf
Monitoring Stove BC Emissions Using Mobile Phones
Innovations
• $500 per unit, ultra low
Micro-Pump and Filter
power.
• Low-tech: works with any
camera cellphone.
• Real-time reporting.
Filter, placed on
reference template
Picture sent
to server
Results sent
back via SMS
25 mm
N Ramanathan, et al,
Atm Environment,
2011
18
Deployment in India for Surya Pilot Phase
Validation with four independent gold standard instruments: Error < 10%
Cookstove samples collected in
India, urabn samples in California
(n=80), comparison with Thermaloptical and Aethalometer
Cookstove samples collected by
the EPA (n=600), comparison with
Thermal-optical reflectance and
transmittance methods.
20
Global BC Monitoring Network Using Mobile Phones
• Will deploy 500 - 1000 cellphones in Surya Demonstration phase to
better understand spatial variability of BC
• Use this data in conjunction with fine-resolution aerosol models
(Prof. Carmichael), to compute BC emissions, and improve
uncertainty in emissions inventories.
A Grand Climate and Health Intervention Experiment
Exposure Implications for Health Impacts from Interventions
Results from Preliminary Comparative Assessments of
“Improved” and “Traditional” Biomass Cook Stoves in India
K. Balakrishnan
Department of Environmental Health Engineering
Center for Advanced Research on Environmental Health, (ICMR, Govt. of India)
World Health Organisation Collaborating Center for Occupational Health
Sri Ramachandra University
Chennai, India
BACKGROUND
• Large base of information on concentrations/exposures
in solid fuel using households in India, but primarily
from traditional (mud) stove users
• Previous intervention efforts have been directed at
distribution of “Improved Cook Stoves”, without explicit
exposure benchmarks for defining improvement
• Multiple market based models now being purchased by
households
• Few efforts to compare “improvements” as compared to
traditional cook-stoves and across multiple “ improved“
stoves
Study design (Paired comparisons)
Indoor Kitchens Using Wood (72 HH; 2 states)
6 sub-groups ; 12 HH in each sub-group
24 hr PM 2.5, CO; HH Questionnaire
6 models of ICS distributed with training (1-2 months)
24 hr PM 2.5, CO (Similar meal); HH Questionnaire
ICS1
FRC
ICS 2
FRC
ICS3
FRC
ICS 4
FRC
ICS 5
FC
ICS 6
FOFC
10% HHs sampled 6 months after ICS provision
HH-Household ; TC-Traditional cook stove; ICS- “Improved Cook-stove”; FRC-Free convection ;
FC-Forced convection; FOFC : Fuel optimized forced convection
Distribution of 24 hr kitchen concentrations
TC-Traditional cook stove; FRC-Free convection cook stove;
FC-Forced convection; FOFC : Fuel optimized forced convection
Comparisons of levels “ before”
and “after”
PM2.5(µg/m3)
Stove Type
Total
Free Convection
Forced Convection and Optimised fuel
Forced Convection
Levels
Base
Post
Base
Post
Base
Post
Base
Post
N
65
68
44
47
10
10
11
11
Median
300
161
329
187
142.5
105.5
302
99
IQR
533
261
524.5
257.5
231.25
158.5
1347.5
139.5
% Difference
p(Wilcox)
46.33
0.002
43.16
0.009
25.96
0.770
67.22
0.032
Levels
Base
Post
Base
Post
Base
Post
Base
Post
N
66
68
45
47
10
10
11
11
Median
5.88
3.40
6.63
3.85
2.79
2.42
6.12
1.32
IQR
8.70
5.69
9.10
5.73
5.36
2.10
9.41
3.89
% Difference
p-value(Wilcox)
42.25
0.0001
41.93
0.004
13.37
0.193
78.46
0.007
CO(ppm)
Stove Type
Total
Free Convection
Forced Convection and Optimised fuel
Forced Convection
Summary
•
Both free and forced convection models showed significant reductions
as compared to traditional cook-stoves (ranging between 43- 67%) for
both PM 2.5 and CO.
•
Our sample could not distinguish across improved stove models; detect
a significant difference with the fuel optimized free convection model;
or detect differences across states
•
The lowest concentrations measured were however still much higher
than the recommended WHO air quality guideline values for PM 2.5
(WHO AQG, Global Update 2005)
•
Several HH determinants would need to be addressed for longitudinal
exposure reconstructions in ICS studies
– Stove use/number of meals (frequency) /cooking duration (length)
– Stove location, change in fuel, ventilation (magnitude)
– Other sources of exposure (confounding)
•
Role of ambient concentrations would need to be defined
Integrated matrices for emissions, exposures and stove use:
Implications for sustainability
TC
Guideline (Choice)
FRC
Ease of use
Emissions
FC
FOFC ?
Guideline (Choice)
Exposures
TC-Traditional cook stove; FRC-Free convection cook stove; FC-Forced convection; FOFC : Fuel optimized forced convection
Note: The chosen guideline is arbitrary on this scale as are the relative positions of the stoves. It is shown to merely illustrate the need to
integrate multiple inputs for choosing a technology to confer a required degree of exposure reduction
A Grand Climate and Health Intervention Experiment
Climate Change Science
V. Ramanathan
On behalf of the Climate Change Team
Seasonal and Diurnal Variation in BC Concentrations: Surya Village Center
Diurnal variation of seasonal mean BC concentration at SVI_1 village centre
(VC).
Seasonal Variation in BC Concentrations: Comparison with Climate Models
Simulated
Ganguly et
Al, 2010
Simulated
Menon et al, 2010
Diurnal variation of seasonal mean BC concentration at SVI_1 village centre
(VC).
How Deep Does the Soot aerosols Penetrate?
NASA-CALIPSO Data
OCT to NOV
DEC to FEB
March to May
Monthly mean LIDAR extinction profiles (532 nm) from CALIPSO for the grid (26–27N
and 80–82E) for post-monsoon, dry and pre-monsoon seasons, respectively. SVI_1 is
located within this grid.
Detection of Brown Carbon Absorption
Absorption Coefft
Brown Carbon ?
Relevance to
Larger
Scale
Correlation
Between Surya
Village and
Indo-Gangetic
Plains
Atmospheric Heating by Aerosols:
(About 60% or more is due to biomass burning)
Potential Signal Strength of the Intervention
Wrap-up for Findings from the Surya Pilot Phase
๏ Cooking drives local outdoor BC concentrations.
๏ Forced draft stoves are best from a BC mitigation perspective.
๏ We can measure surface BC emissions with unprecedented spatial
resolution.
๏ We will be able to measure the BC hole from Surface Based
measurements and Generalize to Regional Scales
• Should be able to Detect it from Space; But a great Challenge;
But NASA is upto it ( Dr. R. Kahn, Goddard)
A Grand Climate and Health Intervention Experiment
Sustainability:
Affordability and Acceptable Adoption
Subhrendu Pattanayak
Duke University
Meta Analysis of Stove Adoption
%+
50%
3
100%
6
9
67%
%-
67%
% ~ 50%
33%
2
2
9
2
100% 50%
67%
50%
50%
100% 33%
50%
33%
3
2
Electricity
$
LPG$
Kerosene$
Coal$
Wood$
Wood?
Credit
2
Income
2
HH Size
Male
Educ.
N
Fem.
Educ.
X
HH
InCredi Energy Access / Supply
Char. come t
Low Caste
Personal Char.
2
33%
100% 50%
67%
50%
• 11 Analyses (8 papers)
• SES, Income, Credit, substitute prices matter!
• Similar findings for meta-analysis (140 analyses from
25 studies) of switching to clean fuels
Scaling up: Some Findings!
I. Who adopts clean fuels and improved cook stoves? (Lewis & Pattanayak)
– SES, education, prices, urban – matter
– credit, information campaigns, social marketing – not studied
II. What factors explain PCIA program location and stove sales? (Colvin,
Pattanayak, Sasser, Vergnano)
– sales impacted by institution (government, location) & product
(price, testing) characteristics
– providers currently in countries with problems (biomass burning,
ARI) and prospects (already spending on health programs)
III. Will cook stove programs be cost-beneficial is a wide variety of settings?
(Jeuland & Pattanayak)
– cost-beneficial stove programs exist, but
– substantial heterogeneity of NPV for different stove types