Increased Air Exchange Rate Protects Health

Sunken pot, 50% thermal efficiency cook stove with chimney

When (oh, when!) will PM2.5 be included in carbon offset methodologies? 

Who can blame stove manufacturers for selling high thermal efficiency/low combustion efficiency stoves when protecting health is not financially rewarded? 

Factories can only sell what the market demands even when they manufacture better stoves. Manufacturers, like SSM, already have slightly more expensive, much cleaner burning stoves ready to go. 

Including PM2.5 in carbon revenue might go a long way to help projects pay for higher combustion efficiency stoves.  

PM 2.5 needs to be reduced by ~ 90% to protect health in kitchens with 15 air exchanges per hour. The needed % reduction is halved when air exchange rates are doubled. This may be the most cost effective way to protect health? Cooking outdoors with an estimated 60 air exchange rates per hour is very effective in reducing exposure.When cooking inside, perhaps a durable stove with improved combustion efficiency and a chimney would help the large percentage of cooks who, for many reasons, continue to cook with biomass?