Investigating measurements of fine particle ( PM _2.5 ) emissions from the cooking of meals and mitigating exposure using a cooker hood

Abstract

There is growing awareness that indoor exposure to particulate matter with diameter ≤ 2.5 μm (PM2.5) is associated with an increased risk of adverse health effects. Cooking is a key indoor source of PM2.5 and an activity conducted daily in most homes. Population scale models can predict occupant exposures to PM2.5, but these predictions are sensitive to the emission rates used. Reported emission rates are highly variable and are typically for the cooking of single ingredients and not full meals. Accordingly, there is a need to assess PM2.5 emissions from the cooking of complete meals. Mean PM2.5 emission rates and source strengths were measured for four complete meals. Temporal PM2.5 concentrations and particle size distributions were recorded using an optical particle counter (OPC), and gravimetric sampling was used to determine calibration factors. Mean emission rates and source strengths varied between 0.54—3.7 mg/min and 15—68 mg, respectively, with 95% confidence. Using a cooker hood (apparent capture efficiency > 90%) and frying in non‐stick pans were found to significantly reduce emissions. OPC calibration factors varied between 1.5 and 5.0 showing that a single value cannot be used for all meals and that gravimetric sampling is necessary when measuring PM2.5 concentrations in kitchens.

A data analysis of the Chilean housing stock and the development of modelling archetypes

“…There are no studies quantifying the deterioration in accuracy of low-cost PM2.5 sensors over time, but their precision depends on the difference between the size fractions they are sensitive to and those emitted by a source. This is compounded by differences in the refractive index of particles from varying sources, and so for accurate measurements a source must be identified and a calibration factor applied, which can range from 0.016 to 12 [27,28]. Therefore, the outputs of these devices can be considered indicative rather than exact [29].…”

“…Pollutant types and emission rates associated with heating and cooking are functions of the fuel, the condition and design of the heater or cooking stove, food types and cooking methods, and the frequency and period of heating and cooking events [28]. The presence and use of fans is not recorded by any known public source, and so would be an area of uncertainty in any model designed to predict ventilation rates in dwellings.…”

Setting the standard: The acceptability of kitchen ventilation for the English housing stock

“…The other meals are considered typical of those cooked on a stove top in Northern Europe and their emission rates and cooking durations are reported by O'Leary et al [47].…”

Residential cooking-related PM2.5: Spatial-temporal variations under various intervention scenarios

“…As cooking fumes disperse in residences, occupants in locations besides kitchens are also exposed to cooking-related air pollution. A growing number of studies have illustrated the strikingly high PM2.5 concentrations and emission rates in kitchens during some cooking scenarios (e.g., frying) [13][14][15][16]. In contrast, only a few studies have examined the dispersion of cooking-related PM2.5 from kitchens to living rooms in residences [14,17,18].…”