Indoor Air Quality for Poor Families: New Evidence from Bangladesh

1
 Indoor Air Quality for Poor FamiliesNew
Evidence from Bangladesh

• Susmita Dasgupta
• Mainul Huq
• M. Khaliquzzaman
• Kiran Pandey
• David Wheeler

2
(No Transcript)
3
How serious is indoor air pollution in Bangladesh?

• Galassi, Ostro, et al. (2000), on health
  impacts in 8 Italian cities whose annual PM10
  concentrations vary from 45 to 55 ug/m3, find
  that reducing these concentrations would yield
  large health benefits.
• Among 236 Bangladeshi households, where PM10
  in indoor air was monitored in our study, by
  contrast, daily average indoor concentrations of
  300 ug/m3 are not unusual.

4
Additional Questions of Interest

• Is exposure largely confined to cooking areas?
• How much difference does fuel choice make for
  indoor air pollution?
• How important is fuel choice for indoor air
  pollution when other household characteristics
  are accounted for?
• How serious is the indoor air quality problem for
  poor families in Bangladesh?
• Are there significant geographic variations in
  indoor air quality?

5
Data

• Indoor air quality (PM10) was monitored for a
  stratified sample of 236 households in Dhaka and
  Narayanganj.
• PM2.5 was monitored for a subsample of 85
  households.
• Monitoring IAP Concentrations
• Thermo Electric Personal DataRAM (pDR-1000)
  real-time monitoring
• Airmetrics MiniVol Portable Air Sampler average
  particulate concentration of ambient air for 24
  hours

6
Q. Is exposure largely confined to cooking areas?
7
Comparative PM10 concentrations in 4 houses
kitchens and living rooms
8
Household PM10 concentrations kitchens vs.
living rooms
Correlation coefficient 0.93
9
Sources of Variation in Household PM10
Concentrations

• Choice of fuel
• Cooking locations (e.g. attached/detached/open
  kitchen)
• Household characteristics (e.g. ventilation
  characteristics of households Structural
  characteristics and ventilation behavior)

10
Sample Composition (Kitchens) Thermo Electric
Personal DataRAM
11
Cooking Locations in Bangladeshi Households
Stove denoted by
12
Determinants of PM10 Concentrations
Liv.Kit.
Kitchen Kitchen Living Living Room
Dummy -40.057
(3.52) Mud Walls 252.921 261.472 253.896 22
9.729 (9.84) (6.67) (6.53)
(6.39) Mud Walls, -158.160 -121.130 -124.058
-163.725 Detached Kitchen (3.99)
(1.72) (1.76) (3.83) Thatch Roof -100.357 -7
0.898 (Living Room) (5.17) (6.01) Kit
chen Windows, Doors -32.016 -39.906
Open After Midday Meal (2.25)
(1.79) Detached Kitchen -46.711 -40.672 -37.599
-57.381 (4.25) (2.48) (2.44)
(4.86) Open-Air Kitchen -64.134 -88.337 -79.887
-80.504 (4.31) (4.11) (3.77)
(5.90) Jute -41.136 -40.645 -45.233 -41.225
(3.45) (1.97) (2.20) (3.27) Kerosene
-89.758 -103.172 -106.729 -76.197
(8.15) (6.59) (7.46) (6.68) Lpg/Lng
-102.597 -113.334 -112.523 -89.441
(4.16) (3.16) (3.40) (3.04) Piped
Natural Gas -136.411 -144.226 -155.285 -135.870
(12.09) (9.27) (10.22)
(10.07) Constant 289.830 287.410 258.563 235.
342 (16.43) (11.47) (17.47)
(19.94) Observations 424 207 234 246
R-squared 0.46 0.41 0.40 0.54
13
I M K
Kitchen (K)
Cooking location
Inside (I)
Building material
Mud (M)
Space
Outside (O)
Other (O)
Living room (L)
14
Household Survey Regions
Rangpur Rajshahi Jessore
Sylhet Dhaka Faridpur Coxs Bazar
15
Regional Indoor Air Pollution Estimates

• Extrapolating from our results, we have
  estimated indoor air pollution levels for a
  random sample of 600 rural, peri-urban and urban
  households in six regions
• Rangpur Northwest
• Sylhet Northeast
• Rajshahi West Central
• Faridpur Central
• Jessore Southwest
• Coxs Bazar Southeast

16
Are there significant geographic variations in
indoor air quality?

• Our results indicate great geographic
  variation, even for households in the same per
  capita income group. This variation reflects
  local differences in fuel use and, more
  significantly, construction practices that affect
  ventilation.
• For the poorest households, rural PM10
  concentrations vary from 410 ug/m3 in Coxs Bazar
  to 202 ug/m3 in Faridpur.
• Even in urban areas, concentrations differ by
  almost 100 ug/m3 between the highest areas,
  Jessore and Rajshahi and the lowest, Sylhet.
• The poorest households in Rangpur face about the
  same mean indoor concentration (198 ug/m3) as the
  highest-income households in Coxs Bazar (195
  ug/m3).

17
Household Use of Clean Fuels
18
How serious is the indoor air quality problem for
poor families in Bangladesh?

• Our results for six Bangladeshi regions suggest
  that indoor PM10 concentrations are quite high
  for many poor families. For all rural families
  with per capita incomes below 1.00/day, we
  estimate a mean PM10 concentration of 275 ug/m3
  for kitchen spaces. This falls somewhat in
  peri-urban and urban areas (to 226 and 193 ug/m3,
  respectively), but remains high.

19
Summary and Conclusions

• High indoor PM10 concentrations for many poor
  families.
• Significant geographic variation in indoor air
  quality.
• Although fuel choice affects indoor air
  pollution, its role appears secondary to the role
  of ventilation factors for households.
• Pollution from cooking diffuses into living
  spaces rapidly and completely.