Cookstove options for safety and health: Comparative analysis of technological and usability attributes

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. - Highlights: • Inefficient fuel combustion stoves raise risk profile in energy-poor households. • This study uses quantitative methods to compare the attributes of four stove types. • LPG stoves have comparatively better ranking for emissions, safety, and durability. • Transformative policies and strategies are required to promote safe, clean stoves.