Grantee Research Project Results
Final Report: Kitchen 2.0: Design Guidance for Healthier Cooking Environments
EPA Grant Number: SU835315Title: Kitchen 2.0: Design Guidance for Healthier Cooking Environments
Investigators: Paterson, Kurtis G. , Peterson, Abram , Wohlgemuth, Alex , Maggio, Jarod , May, Jonathan , Whelan, Kelli , DeYoung, Mark , Ruth, Mollie , Wakeham, Travis
Institution: Michigan Technological University
EPA Project Officer: Hahn, Intaek
Phase: I
Project Period: August 15, 2012 through August 14, 2013
Project Amount: $14,950
RFA: P3 Awards: A National Student Design Competition for Sustainability Focusing on People, Prosperity and the Planet (2012) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Pollution Prevention/Sustainable Development , P3 Challenge Area - Sustainable and Healthy Communities , P3 Challenge Area - Air Quality , P3 Awards , Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Objective:
The objective of the student design project is to address challenges related to poor indoor air quality (IAQ) that result in the death of nearly four million people every year. This project aims to meet this objective through creation of a two-model strategy: an adaptable physical model of a typical cooking environment in many developing communities and a companion computational model. This strategy, collectively called Kitchen 2.0, will allow household air pollution (HAP) researchers and improved stove designers, promoters and adopters to craft more effective, sustainable, and desirable solutions through improved ventilation.
Description
Improved combustion technology for household cooking has the potential of mitigating a significant portion of the global disease burden, deforestation, and fuel collection time in underprivileged countries. Improved cookstove projects also create social benefits, especially to women and children, as well as potential economic benefits, both direct (new fuel or stove enterprises, higher productivity from decreased disease, etc.) and indirect (reduced health costs). However, stove technology use is facing difficult resistance in many communities. The strategy of this proposed project is to improve IAQ through simple human-centered design changes in the cooking environment. The project investigates such solutions through a cost- effective approach that incorporates field and laboratory observations, computer simulations, and participatory design. Field surveys, distributed to our network of international development practitioners, provide detailed information on what technologies, fuels and cooking practices are common in various countries as well as house design and materials. This data was tabulated to begin a global database and also provided information for the design of the physical laboratory. The physical laboratory was used to see how simple design considerations in the cooking environment affect household air pollution (HAP). The model also provided input data for our computational model calibration. The project consists of a multidisciplinary team of students from Michigan Technological University and capitalizes on our considerable network of international programs and partners.
Summary/Accomplishments (Outputs/Outcomes):
The outcomes of the project are: 1) an open-source computational modeling design package -- an online tutorial was created to allow designers, implementers and policy makers to model how changes to pollutant sources (stoves), environment adaptations (ventilation) and scheduling (human behavior) affects exposure, 2) a full-scale physical model for assessing the impacts of cooking, stove, and ventilation design on emission exposure in the home -- performing Controlled Cooking Tests in a model home where ventilation and source parameters can be modified provides a more accurate representation of what can be expected when solutions are used in a real-world situation, 3) a preliminary database providing social, behavioral, and technical insight to global cooking practices -- surveys and interview templates were distributed to Peace Corps Volunteers in eight countries providing vital information on home layouts and materials, stove types available and used, fuel usage, and social interactions of community members, thus providing a platform for participatory design incorporated into sustainable development interventions. Our work demonstrates that improved ventilation is an easy and effective solution to poor indoor air quality and must be included in cookstove implementation projects in order to create a sustainable and effective solution for HAP.
Conclusions:
Improved ventilation is an effective, simple, and community-enabled solution to poor indoor air quality, especially compared to technology-driven changes to cooking practices. Passive ventilation enhancements can improve IAQ as well as the impacts of improved stove interventions. In order to reach World Health Organization recommendations for indoor air quality ventilation, home and behavioral modifications should accompany most stove projects. To reach better community outcomes culturally-specific information is needed on current housing designs and household lifestyle patterns to inform the design and implementation of future projects.
Journal Articles on this Report : 1 Displayed | Download in RIS Format
Other project views: | All 8 publications | 1 publications in selected types | All 1 journal articles |
---|
Type | Citation | ||
---|---|---|---|
|
Ruth M, Maggio J, Whelan K, DeYoung M, May J, Peterson A, Paterson K. Kitchen 2.0: design guidance for healthier cooking environments. International Journal for Service Learning in Engineering 2013;Special Issue:151-169. |
SU835315 (Final) |
Exit Exit |
Supplemental Keywords:
indoor air quality, household air pollution, physical modeling, computational simulations, ventilation, human-centered design, massive open online course, global databaseRelevant Websites:
Facebook: Kitchen 2.0 Exit
Using CFD to evaluate indoor air quality Exit
The perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.