Global S&T Development Trend Analysis Platform of Resources and Environment
DOI | 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.03.022 |
Cookstove options for safety and health: Comparative analysis of technological and usability attributes | |
Kimemia, David1; Van Niekerk, Ashley2 | |
2017-06-01 | |
发表期刊 | ENERGY POLICY |
ISSN | 0301-4215 |
EISSN | 1873-6777 |
出版年 | 2017 |
卷号 | 105 |
文章类型 | Article |
语种 | 英语 |
国家 | South Africa |
英文摘要 | Energy use in low-income households in South Africa is considerably more hazardous than in middle to high income households. Poverty is a key underlying factor. However, poor quality domestic energy technologies, including stoves, heaters and light sources contribute to this vulnerability. The problem is compounded by behavioural and environmental factors. Since cooking is a key energy-using chore, access to efficient, safe and versatile stoves portend safety improvements. This paper reports on a comparative analysis of eleven technological and usability attributes (CO emissions, firepower, efficiency, fuel toxicity, fuel cost, stove price, controllability, durability, availability, temperature of touchable-parts, and mechanical stability) of commercially available stoves that utilise four energy sources (kerosene, methanol, ethanol gel, and LPG). The ensuing discussion serves as a guide to enable the selection of the best-fit stove-fuel combination for low-income households. The findings indicate that LPG stoves have comparatively better overall rankings for cleanliness, firepower, safety, and durability. This analysis highlights that no combustion technology is risk-proof and there remains a burden on users to exercise diligence. We recommend that South Africa adopts an affirmative policy and strategic actions that discourage the use of kerosene as a household combustion fuel, and promotes the adoption of LPG as a safer and practical alternative. |
英文关键词 | Safety Stove LPG, methanol, ethanol gel, kerosene (paraffin) |
领域 | 气候变化 |
收录类别 | SCI-E ; SSCI |
WOS记录号 | WOS:000400532900043 |
WOS关键词 | KEROSENE-RELATED BURNS ; HOUSEHOLD COOKSTOVES ; ENERGY ACCESS ; SOUTH-AFRICA ; LPG ; CONVERSION ; COUNTRIES ; INDONESIA ; STOVES |
WOS类目 | Economics ; Energy & Fuels ; Environmental Sciences ; Environmental Studies |
WOS研究方向 | Business & Economics ; Energy & Fuels ; Environmental Sciences & Ecology |
引用统计 | |
文献类型 | 期刊论文 |
条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.173/C666/handle/2XK7JSWQ/19152 |
专题 | 气候变化 |
作者单位 | 1.Univ South Africa, Inst Social & Hlth Sci, VIPRU, SA Med Res Council, POB 1087, ZA-1820 Lenasia, South Africa; 2.Univ South Africa, VIPRU, Inst Social & Hlth Sci, SA Med Res Council, POB 19070, ZA-7505 Tygerberg, South Africa |
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Kimemia, David,Van Niekerk, Ashley. Cookstove options for safety and health: Comparative analysis of technological and usability attributes[J]. ENERGY POLICY,2017,105. |
APA | Kimemia, David,&Van Niekerk, Ashley.(2017).Cookstove options for safety and health: Comparative analysis of technological and usability attributes.ENERGY POLICY,105. |
MLA | Kimemia, David,et al."Cookstove options for safety and health: Comparative analysis of technological and usability attributes".ENERGY POLICY 105(2017). |
条目包含的文件 | 条目无相关文件。 |
除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。
修改评论