Environment International (Apr 2022)

In-kitchen aerosol exposure in twelve cities across the globe

  • Prashant Kumar,
  • Sarkawt Hama,
  • Rana Alaa Abbass,
  • Thiago Nogueira,
  • Veronika S. Brand,
  • Huai-Wen Wu,
  • Francis Olawale Abulude,
  • Adedeji A. Adelodun,
  • Partibha Anand,
  • Maria de Fatima Andrade,
  • William Apondo,
  • Araya Asfaw,
  • Kosar Hama Aziz,
  • Shi-Jie Cao,
  • Ahmed El-Gendy,
  • Gopika Indu,
  • Anderson Gwanyebit Kehbila,
  • Matthias Ketzel,
  • Mukesh Khare,
  • Sri Harsha Kota,
  • Tesfaye Mamo,
  • Steve Manyozo,
  • Jenny Martinez,
  • Aonghus McNabola,
  • Lidia Morawska,
  • Fryad Mustafa,
  • Adamson S. Muula,
  • Samiha Nahian,
  • Adelaide Cassia Nardocci,
  • William Nelson,
  • Aiwerasia V. Ngowi,
  • George Njoroge,
  • Yris Olaya,
  • Khalid Omer,
  • Philip Osano,
  • Md Riad Sarkar Pavel,
  • Abdus Salam,
  • Erik Luan Costa Santos,
  • Cynthia Sitati,
  • S.M. Shiva Nagendra

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 162
p. 107155

Abstract

Read online

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.

Keywords