[Stoves] Biomass Fired Appliance Characteristics,

Sun Apr 7 14:48:30 CDT 2013

 Features,
	Qualities, Attributes and or Considerations
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Originating-IP: [75.157.129.197]

<html><HEAD><LINK rel=3Dstylesheet type=3Dtext/css href=3D"/telusbeta/stati=
c/deg/css/wysiwyg-3933289048.css" media=3Dall>
<META name=3DGENERATOR content=3D"MSHTML 10.00.9200.16521"></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV> Very well said, Tom,  particularly on the funding issue.&nbsp=
; Regarding the eco-kalan in Negros Oriental, Philippines, durabi=
lity is high in the list of attributes of the stove poor people w=
ill use regardless of where they live -- in town or up in the mountain, rur=
al or in urban communities.  When the stove breaks down, the=
 poor quickly revert to 3 stones and stay that way.  Even the wel=
l to do who buy the eco-kalans think the same way -- save every penny where=
 you can;  that's how you get "rich".</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Rebecca Vermeer</DIV>
<DIV>The Eco-Kalan Project Apr 7, 2013 09:33:15 AM, stoves at lists=
.bioenergylists.org wrote: > 5. Durability and ruggedness, longev=
ity, will it last? will it burn > out? or will it break, what is the=
 lifespan. From what I have heard in recent years at ETHOS, =
on the lists, and from reports of the recent GACC meeting it seems like GAC=
C is willing to sacrifice durability for performance in order to meet carbo=
n and numbers goals. While some cultures may use a 1 year stove, others, es=
pecially in Latin America, value a robust, durable stove. If=
 you were to do a meta-analysis =E2=80=93 study of studies =E2=80=93 of sys=
tematic, multi-year monitoring of stoves including as many of the (now 41) =
criteria on Lanny=E2=80=99s list as you can find, where would durability la=
nd in importance to the consumer? How would the individual stoves rank in d=
urability? How would those results vary across the globe? Mo=
st of us got our start by trying to help the rural poor. Urbanization has i=
ncreased exponentially just since we began these discussions 17 years ago. =
Are current strategies in stove development suited to the needs of urban ho=
useholds? Are we keeping pace with the demographics? Is durability importan=
t to urban households? Finally, if GACC was created to serve=
 us, how can we use it to meet our needs? Where can we find Lanny=E2=80=99s=
 criteria in the framework of GACC? Which of the GACC development tools inc=
luding grants, workshops, and information tools include these criteria? Whe=
re does the money go? What means does GACC have to help those who are attem=
pting to improve, and have demonstrated promising performance, in each of L=
anny=E2=80=99s categories? How do grant recipients score on stove performan=
ce in these categories? Correct me if I am wrong but it seems like the orga=
nizations that are in the best position to get GACC funding are those that =
are at the apex of stove politics rather than performance. We need to figur=
e out how to make the organization benefit those who need it most. =
 Tom _______________________________________________ =
Stoves mailing list to Send a Message to the list, use the email add=
ress stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change you=
r List Settings use the web page http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman=
/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org for more Biomass Cooking S=
toves, News and Information see our web site: http://stoves.bioenergylis=
ts.org/ </DIV></BODY></html>