experimental interventions to facilitate clean cookstove ...€¦ · 2) experiment by varying stove...

Experimental Interventions to Facilitate Clean

Cookstove Adoption, Promote Clean Indoor Air,

and Mitigate Climate Change

Lessons on Adoption of Clean

Cooking: Discussion of Research

Implications and Next Steps

November 17-18, 2016

Robert Bailis Lead-PI, [email protected]

Nadine Unger co-PI, [email protected]

Puneet Dwivedi co-PI, [email protected]

Julian Marshall co-PI; [email protected]

Andrew Grieshop co-PI, [email protected]

Hisham Zerriffi co-PI, [email protected]

Mamta Chandar co-PI, [email protected]

Pradeep Talashery co-PI, [email protected]

16 November, 2016

Objectives

1) assess the availability and acceptability of different

stove technologies and fuels in two Indian states

2) experiment by varying stove price and exchange

policy among users to see how they affect:

• Adoption

• Fuel consumption

• Emissions and exposures

3) model the impacts of stove adoption on climate

through a range of scenarios informed by data from the

field

EPA Project Update - November 2016 2

16 November, 2016

Study design

RCT in 2 Indian States

• Local NGO co-PIs

4 villages each

480 HHs total

• Factorial design


16 November, 2016

Study design

EPA Project Update - November 20164

(replicated in each state)

16 November, 2016

Stoves

1-pot, no chimney (E’fit,

Chulika, Greenway)

2-pot, w/chimney (Prakti, E’fit)

Forced draft (TERI, Eco-chulha)

TLUD (Serval)

Improved tandoor (HP only)

Induction

LPG


16 November, 2016

Timeline

6EPA Project Update - November 2016

Initial acquisition

• Preliminary bazaars

• Baseline surveys and HAP measurements

1st switchouts

• Focus groups

• Interim surveys and AQ measurements

Final switchouts

• Focus groups

• Final surveys and HAP measurements

• Controls receive stoves

Stove use monitoring

20162015 2017

16 November, 2016 EPA Project Update - November 2016 7

16 November, 2016 8

64%

13%

9%

4%

10%

Fuels used

64%

19%

9%8%

100%

76%

6%12%

6%

LPG

Induction

Envirofit Double-pot

Other Biomass stoves

n = 194Fuel mix in the baseline(for treatment HHs)

Stove choices

88%

12%

Only 2-pot mud stove

Kerosene +traditional stoves

Only 3-pot mud stove

Combination of traditional stoves

Others*

*Others include: Only 3-stone fire stove (6), Induction+traditional stoves (5), LPG+traditional stoves (2), and HHs with no information (7)

Karnataka – baseline and stove choice

16 November, 2016 9EPA Project Update - November 2016

LPG72%

Induction14%

Envirofit Double-pot

8%

Other stoves6%

n = 194

N 140 28 15 11

Wealth Index

Education Index

Initial Choice by wealth and education (KA)

HH

ave

rage

ed

uca

tio

nW

eal

th In

dex

16 November, 2016

People want aspirational stoves and fuels

10

…but do they use them?

After 9-10 months:

• Nearly everyone who

chose LPG has used it

• 66% have refilled at

least once

• Usually pay addt’l Rs. 50-

100 for transport

• Wealthier HHs use more


Family in KA community receives LPG kit

16 November, 2016

What about induction stoves?

11

Second choice after LPG

Popular among people wary of LPG

But…

• Need specific pots (supplied)

• HH wiring can be insufficient

• Power outages are common

55% of HHs that chose induction did not use them

• Only 30% used them regularly

• 90% changed to LPGEPA Project Update - November 2016

Family in KA receiving induction stove and utensils

16 November, 2016

Key Lessons

People want LPG or electric stoves

but don’t use them for all tasks

Chimneys are more prevalent than

we thought

• ~60% of HHs have a chimney

• Baseline ~60% lower 24-hr PM2.5


The still use wood for:

• Space heating

• Water heating for

bathing

• Some staples

• Cooking animal feed

• Cultural practices

(e.g. ritual food

preparation)

16 November, 2016

Key Lessons

Induction is a 2nd choice except for

• Existing LPG users in HP

• People concerned about LPG safety (KA)

Few HHs wanted the “improved”

woodstoves

Fewer wanted to keep them - nearly

everyone switched to LPG or

induction when given the option*

* Except the Himanshu, used for cooking and heating in HP


16 November, 2016

What about other results?

KA

• Decrease in PM2.5 in intervention HHs

HP

• Difference in PM2.5 between LPG and non-

LPG HHs

• Decrease in wood consumption in

intervention HHs in 2 communities


16 November, 2016

Next steps

Return to HP for next switchout

Analyze data:

• Soc. Networks

• Climate Modeling

• KPTs

• Quantify adoption

• SUMs

• Socio-demog factors

• Ethnography of HH energy use


16 November, 2016

AcknowledgementsUSEPA grant no. 83542101

GACC grant in support of stove

dissemination

NGO coPIs: Samuha & Jagriti

Communities in HP & KA

Field managers: Grishma Jain and

Karthik S

PhD Students: Deepti Chatti (Yale);

Devyani Singh & Vikas Menghwani

(UBC), Arundhati Jagadish (UGA);

Roshan Wathore (NCSU),

RAs: Adam Walters & Ryan Repoff

(NCSU); Carlos Gould (Yale)


16 November, 2016

EXTRA SLIDES


16 November, 2016

Koppal: Difference from baseline for each

HH

16 November, 2016

HHs with chimneys are much cleaner


Pre-intervention 24-hr PM2.5 in participating KA HHs

16 November, 2016

32%

41%

14%

13%

Fuels used

82%

8%

5%

5%

8%

52%

29%

11%

14%

25%

50%

11%

LPG

Induction

Himanshu Tandoor

Other Biomass stoves

n = 205

Fuel mix in the baseline(for treatment HHs)

Only Solid Fuel

Solid fuel + LPG

Solid fuel + LPG +

electricity

Others

Stove choices

59%11%

15%

15%

HP– baseline and stove choice

16 November, 2016

40%

29%

22%

9%

n = 201

HH

ave

rage

ed

uca

tio

nW

eal

th In

dex

LPG

Induction

Himanshu Tandoor

Other

n = 81 59 45 16

Stove Choice by HH Characteristics - HP

Wealth Index

Education Index

16 November, 2016

34%

30%

23%

13%

5%

Kullu – post-intervention changes

n = 198

< 2 2 3 4 > 4

No. of cylinders used

3%

28%

40%

24%

4%

96%

Wood usage

Less Same

More

86% 14%

Wood usage

Less Same

Less Same

50% 39% 11%

Wood usage

More

LPG

Induction

Himanshu Tandoor

Less Same

33% 67%

Wood usageOthers

LPG

InductionHimanshuTandoor

LPG*

Other

LPG*: Households which had LPG in the baseline

16 November, 2016

Predictors of baseline non-solid fuel use?

All positive correlations unless otherwise stated

Factors that were not significant in either location:

• HHH age, labor participation

• Gender-based decision-making

• Wood collection time


Factor HP KA

Wealth ** **

Caste ** n.s.

HHH = MC ** *

Educ: HHH ** n.s.

Educ: Main cook ** n.s.

HH size n.s. **/*

16 November, 2016

Predictors of baseline non-solid fuel use?

24

16 November, 2016

Stove bazaarsParticipants understood:

• Randomization

• Treatment vs. control

• Switch-out vs. 1-time

selection

Few had trouble paying

“Aspirational” stoves

were most popular by far


experimental interventions to facilitate clean cookstove ...€¦ · 2) experiment by varying stove...

Documents