[Stoves] Jamaican cooking (Crispin Pemberton-Pigott) (Richard Stanley)

Wed Apr 6 15:33:42 CDT 2011

Richard,

Thank you, I think I mentioned it in one of my first posts (back in november
2010), but I am a 26-year-old French, and I moved to Benin 1 year ago to
start a stove production and distribution company. We just started to sell a
few institutional rocket stoves, and are planning to produce also domestic
charcoal stoves. I have a social sciences background, but I have been
interested by climate change and renewable energies for years.

Crispin,

I never said there is no climate change,

OK, I thought you said you didn't believe in global warming.

I am not sure about a chart from Phil.

I was meaning this chart
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/05/global-temperature-still-headed-down-u
ah-negative-territory/#more-37362. It is in fact from Anthony Watts, my
mistake.

everytime there is a hot sport (like Moscow 2010) we are told ?it is
evidence of warming? even though it was freezing cold next door in
Kazakhstan at the

same time.

Yes, the man in the street will believe or not in global warming only with
his own experience. "This hot summer all over Europe is the proof of global
warming" or "it is snowing in December in South of France and they want to
make me believe in global warming.". I heard this latter on French radio
from well-known journalists. They were reasoning like the next-door
neighbour. I had thrills in my back spine. Good old common sense shouldn't
never used to make one's point on a complex scientific question. Nowadays
everyone is a climatologist.

So these localised events need to be compiled by climate scientists, who
deal with considerable amounts of data. Only their work can confirm climate
is globally warmer. They also say extreme climate events occur more often.
I'm sure the men in the street will at least agree with this statement. Not
only in Paris, but in Cotonou. Many Beninese say they saw climate changing a
lot.

it has been warming for 400 years

More info on that here :

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimum_climatique_m%C3%A9di%C3%A9val

It seems that climate started to be warmer in the 17th century, but warming
rose very fast starting from the industrial ages. In fact acceleration seems
to be starting already in the beginning of the 19th century, in the
beginning of industrial revolution.

"Temperature of March 2011 is warmer than temperature of 1979. And is seems
March 2011 is a "down" of the curve, it is probably there will be a "up"
soon." That is an assumption based on what, exactly?

Hum, actually based on nothing but my opinion 
 I should have say: "it is
possible". But time only will tell, it doesn't prove anything.

That is his opinion and he has very little to support it, though lots of
supporters, in my view. There are many others around with different opinions

On the contrary, he has hundreds (thousands?) of studies at his disposal.
The vast majority of the scientific community agreed on climate change
caused by anthropic actions. And in different disciplines.

Two different studies found out 97% of the scientists interviewed agreed on
climate change caused by anthropic action:

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/sciencefair/post/2010/06/scientists-
overwhelmingly-believe-in-man-made-climate-change/1

http://stats.org/stories/2008/global_warming_survey_apr23_08.html 

Here is the long list of the scientific organisations who recognized it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change 

And I am not even sure it is comprehensive.

In France it is simple, it is Courtillot and Allègre VS the rest of the
world, well the rest of the French scientific community, especially the
Académie des Sciences. Allègre especially is intellectually dishonest, in
his last book, dozens of errors have been found by the press and other
scientists. He lied on some facts, and put a chart from Courtillot he knew
had been proven wrong.

So could the majority be wrong? Like in every conspiracy theory, when all
politicians, journalists, scientists agree on one thing, it is likely to be
a very big lie made to manipulate the public and make a lot of money.

That is basically what Claude Allègre was saying on every TV set, based on
nothing, of course. And of course, he was calling for people's common sense.
He even said he was like Copernic. I am pretty sure Copernic had a slightly
more solid argumentation :)

And the scientific community just said: "anthropic action is very likely to
cause global warming". They said "very likely"! I mean there is room for
debate. We are almost sure, enough to want to limitate greenhouse gases
emissions. If we are not, consider it a precaution principle, just like
GMOs.

It cost nothing to limitate CO2 emissions, in fact, at the same time we act
upon other problems.

Energy-efficient buildings:

- mitigate climate change / make households save money / decrease peak loads
on national grids

Clean vehicles

- mitigate climate change / make households save money / decrease dependancy
towards rarer oil / increase air quality

Stoves

- mitigate climate change / make households save money / increase conditions
of living and life expectancy / protect biodiversity by limiting wood
cutting

What do you mean by ?polluting? ? Biofuels, especially wood and charcoal,are
CO2 neutral. Forests have to be managed of course, but I think you are
referring to CO2 as ?pollution?

Sorry, I meant "climate-unfriendly" because of its supposedly high energy
losses during transformation from wood to charcoal, so more wood is cut to
cook a unit of food, meaning less CO2 absorption by trees, etc.

Exactly. And the places to discuss them are elsewhere

Actually, talking about climate change on a stove community discussion list
makes sense, since There is a movement within the stoves community to make
statements about the ?contribution of cooking stoves to climate change.

I am part of this movement, not because I want to apply for subsidies, I
want something commercially sustainable, but because that's why I'm in it.
What I found interesting in stoves was that, correct me if I'm wrong, it is,
like ARC said, one of the cheapest/fastest/easiest way to mitigate climate
change. Save trees, that was and is still my goal. Of course it is more than
that, I want my action to have an impact both in terms of health and
economic empowerment in people's life.

I need to know why I am doing this, because I think global warming caused by
human is real. I would like to be wrong, but unfortunately I think it is
real.

Cheers,

Xavier

-----Original Message-----
From: stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of
stoves-request at lists.bioenergylists.org
Sent: mercredi 6 avril 2011 21:00
To: stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
Subject: Stoves Digest, Vol 8, Issue 7

Send Stoves mailing list submissions to

      stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit

http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists
.org

or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

      stoves-request at lists.bioenergylists.org

You can reach the person managing the list at

      stoves-owner at lists.bioenergylists.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific

than "Re: Contents of Stoves digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Jamaican cooking (Crispin Pemberton-Pigott) (Richard Stanley)

   2. Courier need frorm USA to Uganda soon (Paul S. Anderson)

   3. Re: Jamaican cooking (Crispin Pemberton-Pigott)

      (Crispin Pemberton-Pigott)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1

Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 06:56:00 -0700

From: Richard Stanley <rstanley at legacyfound.org>

To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves

      <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>

Subject: Re: [Stoves] Jamaican cooking (Crispin Pemberton-Pigott)

Message-ID: <9A1B0ED7-D9A2-4245-926D-E9E5AA890239 at legacyfound.org>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Xavier, 

I do not know much about you or even much your work but I have to say that
that was a very refreshing and well referenced post you just entered: It
offers much food for thought. Our own take on charcoal use is much the same
as yours; Viz;  it is there and will coninue to be used ....but we can
optiise it by utilising the 20+ % waste that winds up on the seller's stall
floors, and generally move to its assimilation into non carbonisd biomass in
more efficient stoves...What the charcoal seller offers is not so much the
charcoal but a network and a markeing skill and a established presence in
local markets, globally. 

It is that network we wish to integrate to, for selling 'increasingly
reduced' portions of charcoal in biomass briquette fuel, as we learn more
about how to combust noncarbonised biomass efficiently

Thanks 

Richard Stanley

www.legacyfound.org

NW Obamaland

------------------------------

Message: 2

Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 09:02:20 -0500

From: "Paul S. Anderson" <psanders at ilstu.edu>

To: Karsten Bechtel <karsten at tech.mak.ac.ug>, Stoves

      <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>, "biochar at yahoogroups.com"

      <biochar at yahoogroups.com>

Cc: 'Nicholas Salmons' <nsalmons at lifelinefund.org>, pmkeller at aol.com

Subject: [Stoves] Courier need frorm USA to Uganda soon

Message-ID:

      <20110406090220.10497hgwrdwldlc8 at redbirdmail.illinoisstate.edu>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes";

      format="flowed"

Dear all,

We are seeking a person who will be traveling from the USA to Uganda  

in the next two months, preferably very soon.

A compact piece of scientific equipment (a PEMS data processing case  

about the size of a briefcase) has been repaired at Aprovecho and  

needs to be returned to Uganda.  There is no importation issue because  

the unit has already been inside Uganda for the past two years.

If an earlier courier cannot be found, I will take it with me in  

mid-June.  But they would like to use the unit as soon as possible.

If you know of anyone making a trip to Uganda, please contact me and  

Aprovecho and Karsten Bechtel so that arrangements can be made.

Thanks.

Paul

-- 

Paul S. Anderson, PhD

Known to some as:  Dr. TLUD    Doc    Professor

Phone (USA): 309-452-7072   SKYPE: paultlud   Email: psanders at ilstu.edu

www.gtz.de/de/dokumente/giz2011-en-micro-gasification.pdf   (Best ref.)

Quoting Karsten Bechtel <karsten at tech.mak.ac.ug>:

> Dear Paul, Dear Nick,

> 

> 

> 

> Do you know anyone who comes to Uganda in the next few weeks (or better

> days) to bring the PEMS (is at Aprovecho Oregon) back to UG?

> 

> 

> 

> Please ask you networks to find a reliable person.

> 

> 

> 

> Thank for your help.

> 

> 

> 

> Karsten

> 

> 

> 

> __________________________________________________________________

> 

> cid:image001.jpg at 01C8EE75.3A5CE550

> 

> KARSTEN BECHTEL

> 

> Head of Bioenergy

> 

> College of Engineering, Design, Art and Technology

> 

> P.O. Box 7062, Kampala, Uganda

> 

>   <mailto:karsten at tech.mak.ac.ug> karsten at tech.mak.ac.ug

> 

> Cell:  +256 753 996087        Tel:    +256 414 532008

> 

> Website:  <http://www.creec.or.ug/> www.creec.or.ug

> 

>  cid:image002.jpg at 01C8EE75.3A5CE550

> 

> This position is supported by German development cooperation //

> 

> Centre for international Migration and Development -

> <http://www.cimonline.de/>  http://www.cimonline.de

> 

> _____________________________________________________________________

> 

> 

> 

> 

----------------------------------------------------------------

This message was sent using Illinois State University RedbirdMail

------------------------------

Message: 3

Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 14:20:32 -0400

From: "Crispin Pemberton-Pigott" <crispinpigott at gmail.com>

To: "'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves'"

      <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>

Subject: Re: [Stoves] Jamaican cooking (Crispin Pemberton-Pigott)

Message-ID: <045e01cbf487$5ccc8260$16658720$@gmail.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Dear Xavier

>Sorry, but I strongly disagree with your statement Crispin on global

warming/climate change/climate disruption.

No need to be sorry. You are in good company, as am I. 

>?.what is the real footprint of charcoal over its entire lifetime. 

Agreed.

I agree also that we cannot eradicate it as simply as that. It's not likely

outlawing the entire sector would benefit local economy, on the contrary. In

Benin, many people depend on charcoal supply for their cooking, or simply

because they have a job in the sector. It's not sure either outlawing this

activity would suppress it, nor decrease harmful and warming emissions.

To tack ?warming emissions? on any argument about charcoal is opportunistic,

in my view. Charcoal production causes all sorts of problems and like many

industries that cause problems, it provides employment to a large number of

people too. It extracts more than $50m per year from major cities and pumps

it into the rural economies.

>True, global warming is a good marketing argument a growing number of

businesses in the "green energies" sector benefit. So do I. Does it mean it

is not true? 

Saying it does not make it true.

You could reverse the argument: companies of the fossil fuels sector benefit

the idea there's no such thing as climate change.

I never said there is no climate change, and it is interesting to see the

topic move rapidly one to the other. It is common knowlegde that the climate

changes ? it is always changing. The debate is whether it changes because of

human CO2 emissions, and if so, how much. There is a movement within the

stoves community to make statements about the ?contribution of cooking

stoves to climate change. From my vantage point, it is more about finding

additional funding for projects that are otherwise unsustainable. I am not

convinced you can subsidise sustainable progress.

On one side or another, the hidden interests cannot inform us about the

authenticity of the two theories.

There are far more than two theories. 

Fossil fuel companies (which fund the CRU among many things) benefit

enormously from scares about CO2 and fuel. That benefit is in the form of

higher fuel prices, now at record levels in Waterloo where I am sitting at

present.

In the debate of global warming, we hear so many (conspiracy)theories that

it is also easy to go cherry-picking to give credence to one or another.

Exactly. And the places to discuss them are elsewhere. I recommend

WattsUpWithThat which is very open and invites opinion from all comers, and

Dr Judith Curry?s new discussion site which is not as broad in focus and

high level. 

In the Phil Jones graph you sent Crispin, we can see a global cooling, that

is correct, but only for the period of March 2010 to March 2011, so a period

of one year. 

I am not sure about a chart from Phil. The charts I referred to were from

Courtillot. I was of course referring to Phli?s statement about ?no

significant temperature rise since 1995? which was made some time ago.  He

uses the term ?significant? in the technically correct sense there.

We should be careful not to make Phil Jones say what he never meant. 

Exactly I encourage people to read not only what Phil says but the

temperature charts for their region and the world. Phil said a lot of things

I don?t agree with, too. He has also lied. That doesn?t make him wrong on

everything.

This article quotes an interview of Phil Jones on BBC published saturday

13th of February 2010. Phil Jones, the director of the Climate Research Unit

of the West Anglia university, clearly states that: " The global warming of

(+0.12?C per decade) is the same over three periods (1860-1880, 1910-1940

and 1975-1998), but we notice on the 2002-2009 period a cooling of 0.12?C

per decade. A tendency which is not significative, for the period is too

short".

I am really happy that you include the ?period is too short? because every

time there is a hot sport (like Moscow 2010) we are told ?it is evidence of

warming? even though it was freezing cold next door in Kazakhstan at the

same time. I again encourage people to investigate for themselves and no

take anything at face value. If we took everything on the basis of yelling,

we would have banned paraffin long ago. And candles (they cause a lot of

fires). And knives.

So you are right, there is a cooling, it has even been going on for longer

than one year, but it doesn't contradict the global warming that has been

occuring for a century and a half (since industrial ages). 

I do agree there has been global warming since 1850. However you did not

also point out that it has been warming for 400 years, not only since 1850.

I feel that is a misrepresentation of the facts. It does not warm evenly and

appears to warm and cool in 30 year cycles.

Actually the graph in the link you sent here

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2011/04/uah-temperature-update-for-march-2011-co

oler-still-0-10-deg-c/ confirms it, we can easily see the tendency. 

Agreed. It does show global warming. When did this warming begin, according

to that chart? Are there other charts ?

Temperature of March 2011 is warmer than temperature of 1979. And is seems

March 2011 is a "down" of the curve, it is probably there will be a "up"

soon.

That is an assumption based on what, exactly? Accoding to Prof Courtillot,

who presents a very well reasoned case, it is going to go down for

approximately 30 years. He not, by far, the first person to have made this

prediction. As far as I know his work takes into account a realistic GW

forcing for CO2 though I do not know him as a well known ?modeller?. The

best predictions so far are made by Theodor Landscheidt whose work

encouraged me to start concentrating on space heating stoves.

In this article, a another climatologist explains that the pace of global

warming slowed down, it was anticipated by the climatologists community,

this is what they call "a plateau". Phil Jones said he was "100% sure"

global warming was occuring and it was due to men's actions.

That is his opinion and he has very little to support it, though lots of

supporters, in my view. There are many others around with different

opinions, some of which I have read. Some are better than others. Thereare

hundreds who think that the ?human signature? is not only unproven, but

would be undetectable anyway.

Crispin, you are quoting Vincent Courtillot. He is perhaps a good

geophysician, but he is mostly known in France for being at best very wrong

on climate change questions, at worst a liar (he and his colleague Claude

All?gre). His theories have been unanimously destroyed by the scientific

community, especially by the Acad?mie des Sciences:

http://www.lesechos.fr/economie-politique/france/actu/020895911845.htm?xtor=

RSS-2059. Bard and Delaygue have shown that Vincent Courtillot graphs and

deductions he was basing his theories upon were full of mistakes (what he

admitted himself later on). More info here:

http://sciences.blogs.liberation.fr/home/2008/02/soleil-et-clima.html.

Before that, there was already an affair where the guy forgot in his

calculations Earth's albedo and the fact is was round ...

Perhaps his charts of historical temperatures in North America and Europe

will also be found to be incorrect, and that we are not largely influenced

by Pacific Decadal Oscillation, cosmic ray intensity and Nino events as is

presently supposed by some. As he points out, it is the IPCC models which

have failed to incorporate clouds, albedo and cosmic ray influences well.

Perhaps they also admit to these omissions. I am impressed by scientists who

accept corrections and develop their theories. I hope I am able to do the

same. I was once convinced of many things about stoves which I now know not

to be true. I have not always been successful at communicating my stance.

The proof should be found in the products, of course. Really good stoves do

not come about by accident.

I think we should avoid two misconceptions about stovers :

- there are stovers who do stoves only to limit climate change. It is a

preoccupation of Westerners living in rich countries, often motivated by

economic interests. They do not care about poor locals conditions of living.

They do not make products suitable to this people.

Agreed. Cell phones have been a really big help though.

- there are stovers who are on the field but living in their ivory tower.

They do not see the big picture (global warming). They are only interested

in selling/distributing their stoves to the people, even if they are based

on polluting energies (charcoal).

What do you mean by ?polluting? ? Biofuels, especially wood and charcoal,

are CO2 neutral. Forests have to be managed of course, but I think you are

referring to CO2 as ?pollution? like mercury in fish and phosphates from

farming in rivers. 

You can both make user-friendly stoves, and which play a role in addressing

climate change issue. 

We should make user-friendly stoves that improve all aspects of the

economic, social, natural, family, cultural and spiritual environments. 

Regards

Crispin

-------------- next part --------------

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

URL:
<http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/a
ttachments/20110406/9202f866/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________

Stoves mailing list

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address

stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page

http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists
.org

for more Biomass Cooking Stoves,  News and Information see our web site:

http://www.bioenergylists.org/

End of Stoves Digest, Vol 8, Issue 7

************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110406/3acdc276/attachment.html>