searching for input

well, now that i've finished posting about the Guatemala trip and (almost) the student team projects, i have mostly run out of things to talk about.  there are a few things that ATC are working on that i will talk about in the near future.  in the meantime, do you have any cool ideas for helping people around the world?  do you have any ideas for projects you think we should investigate?  or projects we could give to students for their work? or, what would you like to hear about?  tell me here! 

mentoring, thoughts post project

so.  after my first stint mentoring, what do I think?

I had a great time doing it and was very happy to be the overall coordinator.  if anything, I wish I had MORE info/documents/feedback from the students.  I would have liked to be even more involved. 

I found myself treading the line between being involved enough and pestering them.  I didn’t want to burden their workload with extra reports or additional work they didn’t need to do, but I would have liked to be kept in the loop a little more.  as the “sponsor,” are we just there to provide a project idea and step back or to be fully involved with the students?  obviously the answer lies somewhere in between, but where?  there’s no handbook on this one.

I think in the future I would have a separate conversation with the professor ahead of the semester and find out what his/her vision of our involvement would be.  if I have some sort of idea ahead of time, then I can try to make decisions on how much to bug the students.  this semester there were times when I’d go two or three weeks without hearing from them.  that’s not unreasonable, but in a short semester, that’s actually a chunk of time.  it’s not so much that the students veered off course at all.  it’s more that I am so curious and excited about the projects and progress they make.  I’m sure that, in reality, it will depend on the character of the professor and the class and the particular students, but anyway, that’s something I want to give more thought to next time.

I’ve gained much from this experience and have gotten some confidence that I have something to offer the students.  even if it’s not pure technical expertise, I can certainly help with project management and engineering-type reviews.  I started out the term just being a spokesperson for ATC, giving guidance on what I thought our clients would want/need and what would be available in those areas.  I slowly grew into giving more advice on their strategy and approach.  I even got up my courage to give a pep talk about writing and its role in their future careers.  in the future, if I can feel comfortable doing it, I would love to be able to give them more “life experience” advice.

when I do it again, I will get to know more about the structure of the class and the students’ requirements.  I’d like to get a syllabus and the paperwork describing the assignment and expectations from the professor.  I’ll push for more frequent updates and ask more nosy questions.  and if possible, I would love to get to know the students better.

hopefully I’ll get that chance.  Dr. Thompson won’t be teaching that class again next semester, unfortunately.  but I would love to work with him again in the future.  we have some contacts at Michigan which could pan out, or there are various other schools with which we work.  ATC have said that they would like to have me do it again, so now it’s just a matter of finding a need and developing a reasonable project scope for it...

"like" ATC - we need you!

if you haven't already done so, PLEASE go to facebook and "like" this page for ATC:

The Appropriate Technology Cooperative

the more "likes" we have, the better for us when we apply for grants.  they look at such things these days, believe it or not.

besides, they posted some of my pictures, including some that include me.

thank you!

pardon our dust...

such a great run of daily posts!  i can't believe i was able to keep it up so well.

but now, alas, i am waiting on input.  and then i will have run out of most of the things to talk about...  :(

my last updates on the MSU engineering teams will be about their final output from the projects and some quick bios of the team members.  coming soon.  but i need to get those docs/deliverables from them, which will take at least until the end of the term.  i'm sure they're still feverishly working on the last of the testing, reports, and instruction manuals, as well as wading through their finals.  right from them to you, once i get them!

clean stove team symposium presentation

Second Annual Undergraduate Symposium on International Humanitarian Engineering

Department of Mechanical Engineering, MSU

the clean stove team – Andy, Carly, Dan, and Robert – gave a great presentation during their symposium on april 19^th.  they, too, still have Design Day coming up and will be putting together extensive documentation for ATC on their project, but the symposium really was the peak of their semester.

they started off the presentation with two videos.  one was a moving video about a Peruvian woman and her family and what their life was like before and after getting a clean stove.  with an open fire, she said, you could never get your skin clean, everything was black, she would get burned, and the kids were always sick.  the second video was a speech by Hillary Clinton, talking about the impact of the issue worldwide.  three billion people cook on open fires and dirty stoves, often with babies strapped on their backs.  this creates indoor air that has 200 times the particulate level that the EPA has deemed safe for breathing.  the latest numbers indicate that there are four million deaths per year due to indoor air pollution (more than AIDS and malaria deaths put together), and it is the number one cause of death for infants and children.

the team took us through their research and design process, and presented the theoretical workings of a TLUD stove.  they reviewed the equations governing heat energy, including energy generated, radiation, conduction, and convection.  they introduced us to the ceramicist they worked with for building some of the prototypes, and showed us other rapid prototyping they did to determine optimal hole placement in the combustion chamber.  this included physical models and test results.  an impressive part of the presentation was the show-and-tell of prototypes from all of their testing phases, including the final system design.  and they even used a smoke machine for full effect!

a tri-fold brochure of the project, which will be turned into a poster display for Design Day, was supplemented with two other videos.  one illustrated the secondary burn created by the stove, showing a glowing stick catching fire simply from the heated exhaust gases at the top of the stove.  the other video showed the hand manufacturing process of the clay chambers and the adobe bricks, both of which are realistic methods in the areas where this stove will be used.

treadle pump team symposium presentation

Second Annual Undergraduate Symposium on International Humanitarian Engineering

Department of Mechanical Engineering, MSU

the treadle pump design team -- Ann, Filipe, Jon, and Peter – rocked their symposium presentation!  I wish I could post the whole thing here.  although they have a Design Day event still coming up, this was really their academic deliverable and pinnacle of the semester’s activities.   

they started with a video describing the need and the impact of treadle pumps on farmers and their families in rural India.  this showed that a farmer spends four hours a day walking back and forth with water-laden containers to irrigate their crops during the dry season, in temperatures of 100 degrees.  treadle pumps can make the difference between rich farmers and poor farmers, allowing for more varied crops, larger crops, proper nutrition/housing/clothing for the family, money being saved, expanded farming, and more.  the impact is potentially huge, as in India farming is 17% of the GDP (1.2% in the US) and it employs 52.1% of the workforce (less than 5% in the US).

the bulk of the presentation took us through the process they used in investigating and designing their solution, step by step.  it was a very professional and informative presentation.  after describing – and showing in person! – their final design, the team showed a short video of them using the pump and pumping up water from a river on campus to a bridge above it.

the theme of the presentation was “Walking on Water” and the slides took us along a figurative walking trail from one part of their project to the next.  they also supplied a tri-fold brochure containing the problem definition and design specifications, the solution, the approach, and the results and conclusions.  these items have been detailed in prior posts, but the brochure was an excellent and visually appealing summary of the project for the audience, which included a dean/department head, an administrator, and a vice president of the university, at least. 

here you can see their team video of the working pump:

and here is their whole presentation video!



the clean stove design solution

Andy, Carly, Dan and Robert decided on the TLUD (top-lit updraft) stove for their final design.  it won out both in their decision matrix and in their testing.  the next trick was to implement the design on a larger scale, one that would accommodate a plancha and large pots. 

stove schematic

burn schematic

based on easy availability in developing areas, the team decided to use ceramics to build the combustion chamber and housing.  the inside of the chamber is where the fire is built, and it has holes around the bottom and top of its cylinder.  these allow fresh air to come in at the bottom, and heated air to come in at the top, where the fuel has already been gasified.  the mixture of fresh oxygen and gasified fuel (exhaust) creates a secondary burn that eliminates most of the pollutants and creates a very hot fire for cooking.  the outer chamber has large holes in the bottom to allow fresh air to feed the fire.  together, the ceramic pieces create a working TLUD.





earlier prototypes

in total, the team created five generations of prototypes.  this became necessary when the original ceramic chambers cracked due to extremely high temperatures (over 1000 degrees!), achieved too quickly.  the first generation consisted of the two paint can stoves used to test out the concepts of rocket vs. TLUD stoves.  the second prototype level was the ceramic stove which was designed for testing various configurations by plugging and opening different holes, but which broke due to heat shock.  the third generation of prototypes were ingenious tiny stoves made up of soup cans for the outer chamber and soda cans for the inner.  these helped the team determine the optimum size and location of the holes in the inner chamber.  by experimenting with five different configurations, they were able to decide the specs for their next generation, a full-sized metal version of the stove made from five gallon buckets and sheet metal.  when this proved successful, they had another clay model built, this time with different clay and additives to withstand the thermal shock.  this final product is the one they will use for more testing.

generations three and four                                                                            

the other components of the stove were determined with Guatemala and similar areas in mind.  the plancha, or griddle, used for the heating surface is readily available and very familiar to people.  the team also created their own adobe bricks with mud and straw to build an enclosure around the hot TLUD stove.  this will be very familiar to local people and will also prevent burns.  because the burning process is so efficient and clean with the TLUD, the students decided that a flue was not necessary, though it could be added at a later date.  all together, the combination makes an exciting stove project.

the final design

the treadle pump design solution

Ann, Filipe, Jon, and Peter created a prototype treadle pump that they showed off during their symposium presentation on april 17^th.  it was compact, looked durable, and functioned very easily, even dry.

the finished design

their presentation was equally impressive!  it was attention-grabbing, well-organized, and as professional as anything I’ve seen in 23 years of being in industry.

 

the team’s solution to the problem of affordable irrigation for rural farmers was smaller and lighter than the original ATC design, and pumped water at the theoretical limit of pumping height for such a pump (7.5 meters).  it had a small, solid footprint and no need for a handle.  the wood frame can easily be made on site with local materials like bamboo.  they also employed a mesh screen to protect the valves from larger pieces of contamination.  the students designed a valve box and pump housing instead of the external plumbing and connections used on the original pump design.  spring-loaded check valves divided the box into intake and output chambers instead of using a piece of thin rubber sheet in the pistons themselves.  steel was used for the pump housing/cylinders instead of PVC for the sake of durability and better flow control.  the pistons were made of sheet metal and simple bar stock.  due to time constraints, they were not able to injection-mold their own piston seals (though they had plans to), so they used the ones they got with the MoneyMaker pump.  the team even painted the whole prototype in the colors of the Indian flag (their primary target market). 

India's flag

incidentally, this worked out well since the flag colors are MSU’s colors (green and white) plus orange.

here are the specs between the original ATC design and the MSU students’ design:

	Original ATC Pump	MSU Treadle Pump
flow rate	4 gal/min	10 gal/min
operating force	10 lbs	45 lbs
overall weight	110 lbs	60 lbs
prototype cost	over $400	about $100

original ATC and new MSU treadle pumps

clean stove findings

the clean stove team studied some general principles concerning stove and burning efficiency.  some are obvious, others more technical.  clearly, efficiency depends in part on the prep of the wood, including using smaller pieces with more surface area, and better drying with coverings, heat, wind, etc.  many fluid dynamics principles are also key such as controlling heat as it travels to the point of heat exchange, reducing time that the heat takes to get from the source to the food, and improving the flow of exhaust fumes out the flue.  turbulence of the air/fuel/flame mixture will help with increased temperatures and complete burning.  in general, insulating the stove to keep heat in and warming (and speeding up) intake air also helps, as does creating a good draft of exhaust.  further, a two part combustion process allows complete burning of the wood material and elements, producing only carbon dioxide and water and producing almost no smoke.  primary combustion happens through the production of coals and embers, and secondary combustion creates a gas burn and actual flame from the emissions coming off the coals/embers.  understanding all of this and a process called wood pyrolysis were important in developing a cook stove concept.

the team organized their benchmarking by four main concept areas.  for the most part, it is possible to mix and match from each category to make different stove systems. 

·    fuel type was limited to wood, which is commonly used and widely available in Guatemala and other developing areas. 

·    combustion chamber was by far the most complex area for consideration.  five main types were investigated and will be discussed below.  

·    heat transfer methods, ways by which the heat is brought to the pot/food, included griddles, grates, open flame, pot skirts, radiant heat, and forced air.  open flame is the current method with a three stone fire; griddles and grates are clear; radiant heat is like using an oven; and forced air pushes air through a device with a fan.  pot skirts are a cool idea that optimize the cooking interface.  basically, a skirt goes around and up the sides of a pot, holding heat against it more tightly and longer, transferring much more heat to the food.  unfortunately, that requires exact skirts for each pot.

·    finally, three flue designs were considered:  straight, balanced, and valved.  straight flues – simple pipes that lead exhaust air out of the stove -- are the easiest and cheapest types of flues.  balanced flues take in cool air from outside, allowing it to be heated by the exhaust air in a central pipe, and use that pre-warmed air as oxygen input to the fire.  this improves the efficiency of the fire but is more expensive.  an open air fire uses no flue at all.

the team narrowed down their main concepts to six stoves (combustion chambers):  three stone open air (baseline), clay enclosed, rocket stove, TLUD stove, downdraft J chamber, and charcoal combustion chamber. 

·    a three stone fire (see photo from the original design challenge post) cooks with an open flame and a pot balanced on three stones over the fire.  because heat escapes in all directions, it is highly inefficient and allows much of the fire’s energy to dissipate in ambient heat and smoke, rather than high temperature delivered to the cooking surface.

·    a clay enclosed stove simply contains the fire within walls.  this allows the heat to be more focused, but does not appreciably increase efficiency.

·    a rocket stove uses an L-shaped chamber where small pieces of wood are loaded into the bottom, resulting in the ends of the sticks burning.  concentrated heat goes up into the chamber to a relatively small cooking surface.  this design allows very little wood  to create quite a lot of focused heat. 

·    a top-lit updraft stove (TLUD) produces a secondary burn area where much of the exhaust particulates are combusted, producing much less smoke and less waste of energy.  once again, small pieces of wood are used, but they are placed into the top of the combustion chamber.  as the wood pyrolyzes at the bottom of the stove chamber, gases flow up the sides of the chamber and are re-ignited near the top, creating an even hotter flame and more completely burning excess particulates. 

·    a downdraft J chamber stove acts similarly to a rocket stove, but the fuel is loaded from the top and heat flows sideways before going up to the cooking surface.

·    a charcoal combustion chamber stove is said to be similar to other stove designs, but uses a reflective surface inside to reflect heat back into the chamber.

the team used decision matrices to examine their options for combustion chambers, heat transfer methods, and flue designs.  a decision matrix takes the original design specifications and weights relative to one another for importance.  each concept is then evaluated as to how well it meets each criterion, and the score for each is determined by adding the weighted evaluations.  using this method, the best two concepts for combustion chamber were the rocket stove and the TLUD.  for heat transfer, a griddle stood out far and above the rest.  for flue design, especially since cost and easy manufacturability are important, a straight flue beat out a balanced flue.  the combustion chamber decision matrix is included here in case you are interested.

having thus figured out their best design options, the students went about building simple prototypes of a rocket and a TLUD stove.  they used metal paint cans as the main component of their combustion chambers, and assembled other parts from easily available products (sheet metal, other cans, rocks, etc.)  time and temperature were collected from a boil test with each stove.  the rocket stove took 21 minutes to boil four cups of water while the TLUD took only 12, a 43% improvement.  (though it should be noted that there were difficulties in keeping the rocket stove lit at the beginning, possibly biasing the data.)  the second test determined the amount of time each stove could maintain a cooking temperature with a set amount of fuel.  this test appeared to also favor the TLUD stove.  the team also measured outside skin temperature of the stoves and found the same results from both stoves:  too hot to be touched.

next up:  the design solution!

team's TLUD stove prototype

treadle pump findings

the treadle pump team found a lot of things to improve with the current ATC design and some even with the commercially-produced MoneyMaker pump.  they investigated different design concepts for each of their seven categories, and developed three main system approaches to the treadles and overall structure of the device.  ultimately, the students decided to focus their work on the pump body (valves and piston seals).

ATC pump piston with
leather seals

in building the original ATC treadle pump design, the students found a number of areas for possible improvement.  first, they had difficulty creating the pistons and seals, then they had a very difficult time operating the finished project.  it turned out that some modifications had been made by the original team but not captured in the published instructions.  in general, material selection for the cylinders (PVC plastic), pistons (leather), and valves (thin rubber) were not ideal for function, and durability was also a concern.  the ATC pump is high off the ground and could be improved ergonomically, and its weight and size are awkward.  having said that, it was still a great design and a fabulous first shot at the product.  now this team gets to further improve it.

MoneyMaker pump

very extensive benchmarking of the MoneyMaker pump yielded even more information than I expected.  this pump is quite well designed and optimized already.  it’s lightweight, pretty portable, and durable.  the team found that the handle bar fitting was loosely sized, possibly leading to some instability.  they also expressed concern about the durability of some bushings, and were very surprised to find that the cylinders were simply formed sheet metal.  one important discovery was that there is a channel between the two cylinders and an intentional leak path past the pistons.  these features allow water to sit on top of the pistons, both lubricating and sealing them.  the pump is capable of moving 5 gallons of water at a height up to 7.5 meters in less than one minute (with a strong operator).

the team organized their component investigations into seven main concept areas:  piston seals, valves, frames/bases, mobility/stability, treadles, linkages, and intake filters.  they particularly focused on piston seals and valves.

the students explored various seal materials in order to find some that would eliminate the use of leather, improve manufacturability, be readily available, and provide the effectiveness and durability that leather did not.  in addition to the baseline of leather, they looked at hard rubber, rubber from a bike or truck inner tube, and flip flop rubber (which is easily available worldwide).  tradeoffs included availability, durability, coefficient of friction, and formability.  four different seal types were considered:  cup seals, labyrinth seals, u-seals, and flat “O” seals.  each behave quite differently, and, of course, have their own advantages and disadvantages.

rubber patch valve

valves presented another challenge for the team.  they are critical for the pump’s efficiency, preventing backflow of water and keeping air and water flow controlled.  the current ATC design uses thin rubber patches to achieve this purpose, which is inexpensive and readily available, but hampers really effective use of the pump.  the team investigated ball-check valves, hinged valves, shuttle valves, and improvement to the rubber flapper design on the existing pump.  in the end, shuttle valves inside a valve box were deemed the most cost effective and robust.

bike gear concept

three overall concepts were developed for the structure of the treadles and pump body.  the first was a complete plumbing supplies system that would utilize typical materials like angle iron, sheet metal, steel tubing, copper pipe, slip-on pipefittings, and other standard plumbing items.  a pyramidal base platform would be paired with steel tubes for the pump cylinders and copper pipes for the rest of the plumbing.  finally, speed-rail would be used to make the treadles.  the second design concept utilized a bike, something which is readily available in developing countries and can also be found in dumps.  in this concept, nearly all parts of a bike would be useful for building a pump system, including the sprocket and chain as a pivot for the pistons’ up-and-down movement.  wheels would be used for the base, and the handle bars and fork as a handle support for the operator.  the final concept used a t-frame structure similar to the MoneyMaker pump.  additional, less ready-for-prime-time ideas were proposed for possible future consideration, including a flywheel, toggle mechanism, crank mechanism, and recumbent design.

in the end, the students decided to focus on the guts of the machine – pump housing, pistons, seals, and valves.  the outer mechanical structure of the frame and treadles is a possible optimization for another team someday.

next up:  the design solution!



comparison of ATC (rear) and MoneyMaker (front) pumps



approach -- clean stove

although both teams had similar (basic engineering) approaches to their projects, I want to give them each their own space.  I’ll do my best to elaborate a little bit on what each team did without boring you to death or being too repetitive.  today:  the clean stove team.

Andy, Carly, Dan and Robert took this approach, more-or-less in order, for the clean stove design:

1. defined and weighted important design specifications – the team came up with 24 different design specs that they would use to design and evaluate their concepts.  they picked energy consumption as the top criteria, followed closely by function/performance, and considered noise radiation, operating instructions, and quantity to be the least important considerations.
2. researched cultural conditions and material availability in Guatemala – the team made local contacts who had lived or spent extensive time in Guatemala and enlisted them to aid in the understanding of what a family would need, would be willing to pay, and could expect to find available there.
3. divided the overall system into four main components (power source, combustion chamber, heating interface, and exhaust system) – this allowed the students to evaluate and pick from among various concepts for each main function.
4. researched different stove types available – the team provided a benchmarking report that discussed nine different high-efficiency stoves utilizing different combinations of the components mentioned above.
5. benchmarked separate components and overall stove designs -- power source ultimately focused simply on wood, though the team discussed five other alternatives.  initially, ten combustion chamber arrangements were considered.  six heat transfer devices/aids and three different flues were also investigated.
6. compared and evaluated best design concepts – in order to narrow down the field of potential concepts, the team evaluated multiple stove designs against the 24 design specifications established at the beginning.  they rated each one and used the weighted scores to select the final contenders.
7. built prototypes – once they thrifted the investigation to two main concepts, the team built two working prototypes for further work.
8. tested prototypes – the “rocket stove” and “TLUD” stove were tested for temperature, burning efficiency and general performance.  (more details on what these are in a later post)
9. selected final design concept – in the end, the team decided to go with the “TLUD” stove concept due to better performance and cultural/logistical concerns.
10. modeled key performance elements mathematically (combustion, thermodynamics, fluid dynamics) – general efficiency variables included fuel metering, temperature, insulation, re-ignition of escaping smoke, oxygen, input velocity, firewood configuration, and draft. 
11. built final product – as of this writing (4/11/13), the first of the final products was built and tested last night, with varying degrees of success.  future posts will give more details.

approach – treadle pump

although both teams had similar (basic engineering) approaches to their projects, I want to give them each their own space.  I’ll do my best to elaborate a little bit on what each team did without boring you to death or being too repetitive.  today:  the treadle pump team.

Ann, Filipe, Jon and Peter took this approach, more-or-less in order, for the treadle pump design:

1. defined and weighted important design specifications – the team came up with 21 different design specs that they would use to design and evaluate their concepts.  these ranged from a weight of 10 for function/performance and for product upkeep (service, maintenance, reliability, operating costs) to a weight of 1 for quantity and for government regulations.
2. built ATC pump design – using the previously-developed treadle pump design manual (by university of michigan students), the team built their own ATC pump for testing and evaluation.  they found a few parts difficult to make, and found the final design to be somewhat difficult to operate, requiring a lot of strength.  the crux of the issue seemed to be the piston design.  other potential issues included material choice, overall height/ergonomics of the operating pump, and the lack of a leakage path past the pistons. 
3. researched existing designs available – the team investigated many different designs that they researched using the internet and other contacts they developed, including a Stanford PhD project that provided particular insight to the pumping mechanism.  by far, the most successful design is one called the MoneyMaker by a company named KickStart.  they sell the product quite successfully around the world in developing areas.
4. divided the overall system into seven main components (piston seals, valves, frame/base, treadles, linkages, mobility/stability, and intake filters) – this allowed the students to focus their efforts and understand the relative drawbacks and benefits of existing designs.
5. evaluated concepts for each main component – they brainstormed various different concepts for each of the main components identified.  some of the cool ideas they came up with included using old bicycles for parts of the frame, using a bicycle chain and gear as a pivot for the pistons, and using plumbing supplies for the overall construction.
6. refined focus of project to pump (pistons, seals, valves) – in the end after much investigation, the team decided to focus their efforts on the pump housing and functional innards, allowing the frame and treadles to be simple and similar to those already defined in the ATC design.  this is a possible subject for a future project, as ergonomics and local material availability/selection could surely by optimized if there was more time.
7. bought and extensively benchmarked KickStart MoneyMaker pump – the MoneyMaker is really the current state-of-the-art for treadle pumps.  the design has been produced and optimized by a company for many years, and is in use by hundreds of thousands of rural farmers throughout the world.  the students got their hands on one (despite it strictly not being made available in the U.S.) and benchmarked it as thoroughly as I have ever seen a product examined.  in addition to all the physicals of the pump and its parts, they evaluated performance and identified possible weak points for improvement.
8. modelled key performance elements mathematically – I must admit, I have not yet seen their modeling parameters or results, but I know that they have already looked at flow paths and theoretical output of the system.
9. built final product – i’ll save this for another time.

the design problem -- clean stove

the other MSU team (Andy, Carly, Dan, Robert) are working on developing a “clean stove” which can replace indoor three stone fires and improve the health and resource efficiency of the families using them.

(taken from a document produced by John Barrie)

Problem:

Smoke from indoor cooking fires is the #1 cause of death for infants ages 6 months to 5 years.  The World Health Organization estimates that more than two million premature deaths annually are caused by exposure to smoke from traditional cookstoves and open fires, with women and children the most afflicted. That makes it one of the top five overall health risks in poor, developing countries, and the cause of twice as many deaths as malaria.  There are also significant issues with burns and injuries to women and children due to the fire itself or pots spilling over.

Solution:

Design an inexpensive clean burning bio-fuel stove that can be made in the countries where the stove will be used. 

  

Design Challenge:

•           Evaluate existing designs for clean burning stoves.

•           Find open source drawings for clean burning stoves.

•           Design a program for measuring the efficacy of clean burning stoves.

•           Prototype clean burning stoves.

•           Measure stove performance.

•           Choose stove designs to be part of ATC Design Library.

•           Create ATC binder of Clean Stove data.

•           Contribute to ATC Clean Stove webpage.

•           Create clear, easy to read and comprehend drawings of a clean burning stove for distribution by ATC.

 

more key facts:

(taken from WHO Fact Sheet)

• Around 3 billion people cook and heat their homes using open fires and leaky stoves burning biomass (wood, animal dung and crop waste) and coal.
• Nearly 2 million people die prematurely from illness attributable to indoor air pollution from household solid fuel use.
• Nearly 50% of pneumonia deaths among children under five are due to particulate matter inhaled from indoor air pollution.
• More than 1 million people a year die from chronic obstructive respiratory disease (COPD) that develops due to exposure to such indoor air pollution.
• Both women and men exposed to heavy indoor smoke are 2-3 times more likely to develop COPD.

in future posts, i'll talk about what the team's approach has been, their findings, and their solution.