[Stoves] Grates and chimneys

[CHRISTA ROTH]

Am 09.02.2012 um 21:55 schrieb Kevin:

> Dear Christa
>
> # Are the Users actually using wet wood,
CR: in the areas that I have worked the prevailing answer is YES, and  
with more scarcity of resources even those in Malawi that used to  
stockpile wood for the rainy season have stopped doing so as they  
can't afford it any longer
> or is this the excuse the Stove Designer gives for why his stove  
> doesn't work properly for the application? Was the stove actually  
> designed to burn wet wood?
CR: Most stoves are designed and tested with dry wood. the rocket-type  
stoves with the solid grates to preheat and predry the fuel do a good  
job handling moist fuel.
> Don't the Users have enough experience with stoves and chimneys to  
> know that burning wet wood in a stove that is not designed to burn  
> wet wood will create creosote and tar deposits in teh chimney?
CR: in the areas that I have worked the answer is simply NO. on the  
contrary: wet wood is often seen to 'last longer' as it does not burn  
up so quickly.
>
> many users in developing countries  collect their
> fuel in short-term intervals (daily/weekly) and dont' build up a fuel
> stock-pile, so the fuel has little chance to dry.
> wet seasons in tropical climates don't help either to get or keep fuel
> dry.
>
> # Why not provide a stove system that can actually deal with those  
> conditions?
CR: good question.... and a  tall order
Yet: A stove is only a resaonably small part of the system stove-fuel- 
user-ventilation that determines indoor air quality, so far the focus  
is on emissions of a stove with dry fuel and correct use, but the  
discussions on the standards go into the right direction of testing  
abilties of stoves to handle 'realistic' fuels.
>
> if the climate allows, I would rather have a cooking space as open as
> possible and not have chimneys.
>
> # If you had a choice between
> 1: Acceptable Indoor Air Quality.
> OR
> 2: An open cooking space with no chimney,
> which would you choose?
this to me is not an 'either-or' scenario:  a good kitchen design can  
have more impact on acceptable air quality (levels of human exposure)  
than a stove (source of emissions) .
I always would advocate for point 2:, as it is low-maintenance and  
less depending on changes of user behaviour: knock the holes in the  
right places and guide the smoke out.. air exchanges do wonders to  
bring exposure levels down, even wihtout user training.
  but so far we havent got a lot of data to inform us about the degree  
of importance of kitchen designs on exposure as this is expensive to  
measure and the current focus is on stove emissions.
>
> I would also try to avoid the introduction of chimneys in cultures,
> where there is no word for 'maintenance' in the local vocabulary,
>
> # Do they have words for "Stoves Venting into the Living Space",  
> "Poor Indoor Air Quality", "Health Hazard", "Premature Death",  
> etc? :-)
CR: in malawi where I have worked most, these concepts are rare and  
mostly not existing.
for many the health aspect is not a 'sales' argument to get a stove.  
That is what 'we' think, but does not rank high in many peoples  
reasons to acquire a stove.
> Clearly, if the 3 stone fire in the living space is causing health  
> problems, and the USer wishes to improve on the situation, the User  
> must make changes, like, getting a better stove system AND learning  
> how to use it properly.
WEll, only if there is awareness. I have talked to many users in  
Malawi who do NOT see smoke as a (health)  problem, on the contrary I  
have heard often 'smoke is good for us', 'smoke preserves the ....'
> An appropriate training program MUST be included with the hardware  
> that is supplied to deal with the problem. If the User does not want  
> to learn how to use the new system properly, then it is destined to  
> fail.
CR: hitting the nail right on the head, but these days most focus is  
on scaling up numbers of stoves out there, which does not necessarily  
translate into 'stoves correctly used'. the users are the weakest  
tlink between 'stove sold' and 'impact through good use'.

>
> as
> the concept then is unlikely to be deeply rooted.
> depends where you are
> regards christa
>
> # I would suggest that the most important thing is a clear statement  
> of priorities. There is no such thing as "One Stove Fits All".  
> Stoves must be designed to suit local circumstances, and the cooking/ 
> heating task to be accomplished.
CR: correct! so first get the priorities of your target group, then  
make a choice  of stoves available that would suit different needs and  
economic situations.
>
> # Concerning Indoor Air Quality resulting from the use of "Improved  
> Stoves" that vent the products of combustion into the living space,  
> would you know of any that meet air quality and safety requirements  
> necessary to be approved for use inside a home in Germany, Canada or  
> the US? If not, why are stoves that are unacceptable for use in  
> Germany, Canada, or the US considered acceptable for use in poorer  
> homes in Under Developed Countries?
  maybe purchasing power????

>
> Best wishes,
>
> Kevin Chisholm
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20120210/0ec45c38/attachment.html>