Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
ABSTRACT
This study was carried out to establish how the advanced
bioethanol gel fuel cookstove compares with its
counterparts in terms of indoor pollution. The tests were
conducted by using modified WBT where 2.5 L of water
in a 3 L cooking pot were brought to local boiling point
(95.2C). Portable emission monitoring system (PEMS)
with indoor air quality meter, model 7545 and the
University of California Berkeley (UCB) particle
monitor were used for monitoring and recording the
concentration of CO, CO2, and PM2.5. The overall CO
emissions over the entire WBT for the advanced,
motopoa, and motopoa imara stoves were 1.365, 2.13,
and 3.725 ppm, in that order, while CO2 emissions were
found to be 1100, 1065.5, and 1040 ppm, for the
advanced, motopoa, and motopoa imara stoves,
respectively. These values are within the acceptable
limits (6 ppm) for CO concentration and (1200 ppm) for
the concentration of CO2 in 24 h exposure time limit as
per WHO, USEPA, and ASHRAE guidelines. On the
other hand, PM2.5 emitted by the three stoves were 86.89,
82.67, and 133.56 g/m3, correspondingly. These values
are above the recommended limit (25g/m3) as given by
WHO. The CO/CO2 ratio for the advanced, motopoa and
motopoa imara stoves were 0.001 24, 0.001 99, and
0.003 58, respectively.
Keywords - Advanced, CO, CO2, Motopoa, Motopoa
imara, PM2.5.
1. Introduction
The combustion of biomass fuel either in solid or liquid
form produces harmful gases such as carbon dioxide
www.ijaert.org
2. Methodology
Experiment was carried out at the University of Nairobi
in a special kitchen designed for testing performance of
stoves. The size of the room was 250250 cm, it had two
windows of 8758 cm and one door of 20387 cm.
During the experiments, one window and door were left
open for ventilation and there were no other source of
pollution except stoves and two people who were
monitoring the experiment. Indoor background CO2
varied between 800 and 1000 ppm. At the end of each
experiment, both windows and door were left open for 5
to 10 min to allow air pollutants emitted during the test
to leave the room to prevent interference from residual
pollutants. Stoves were tested by raising water (2.5 L) in
a standard aluminium cooking pot (3 L) to local boiling
point of Nairobi (95.2C) [13].
Emission tests were done by portable emission
monitoring system (PEMS) which comprised of 1)
Indoor Air Quality Meter Model 7545 (IAQ-CAL) for
measuring CO and CO2 concentrations and 2) the UCB
particle monitor for measuring the concentration of
particulate matter (PM) of less than or equal to 2.5
micrometer.
2.1. Indoor Air Quality Meter (IAQ-CALC)
Indoor Air Quality Meter (Fig. 1) was used to measure
and record the concentration of both CO and CO2 in the
room. It measures the concentration of CO2 in the range
of 0 to 5000 ppm, has an accuracy of 3% of reading or
50 ppm, and its made with non-dispersive infrared
(NDIR) sensor for measuring CO2. For the case of CO,
the device measures the concentration of CO in the range
of 0 to 500 ppm, has an accuracy of 3% of reading or
3 ppm, and the type of sensor used for measuring CO is
electro-chemical. Both CO2 and CO concentrations were
recorded in the internal memory of the device and then
downloaded to PC for analysis.
www.ijaert.org
www.ijaert.org
Figure
4: Motopoa stove
www.ijaert.org
values were 1.365 ppm for the advanced stove, 2.13 and
3.725 ppm for motopoa, and motopoa imara stoves,
respectively. Fig 7 shows the profiles of CO emission
from the beginning of test when fuel reservoir was full
and the fuel level was close to the pot to the end of test
when fuel reservoirs were nearly empty for the case of
motopoa, and motopoa imara stoves and the fuel level
had dropped significantly. For the case of advanced
stove, the fuel level remained the same as it was
maintained by adjusting the piston. Fig 8 shows average
CO concentrations with their corresponding standard
errors emitted by the three stoves tested: 1.3650.645,
2.130.68, and 3.7250.325 ppm, for the advanced,
motopoa, and motopoa imara stoves, respectively.
The results show that all the three stoves were producing
CO concentrations within the recommended limits (6
ppm for 24 h exposure time) as given by WHO [19, 20].
However, advanced stove emitted the smallest amount
(1.365 ppm) compared to that of motopoa stove (2.13
ppm) and motopoa imara stove (3.725 ppm), this was
attributed to proper fuel-air mixing afforded by piston
adjustment mechanism, which raised and maintained the
fuel at an optimal level thereby ensuring complete
combustion that translate to emission of CO2 and little or
no CO.
Motopoa imara stove gave higher CO concentration
(3.725 ppm) compared to that of motopoa (2.13 ppm),
and the advanced stove (1.365 ppm), because of the poor
design, especially the pot gap which was very small (5
mm) instead of the recommended one (25 to 30 mm)
[13]. Small pot gap limits the flow of air into the
combustion chamber leading to incomplete combustion
and emission of more CO than CO2.
3.2. Total carbon dioxide (CO2) produced
www.ijaert.org
Average CO
(ppm)
Average
CO2 (ppm)
CO/CO2
Advanced
stove
1.365
1100
0.001 24
Motopoa
stove
2.13
1065.5
0.001 99
Motopoa
imara stove
3.725
1040
0.003 58
www.ijaert.org
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
www.ijaert.org