[Stoves] Prakti two-burner stove features in article on "protecting the poor from climate change policies"

[Richard Stanley]

Crispin outside of fox news and its minions and petro funders, you remain entrenched with the notion that we are not experiencing global climate change. I can see the former two as stupidity fed by corruption  but you as one of the most solid rational contributers to this list amaze me with your position. One glance at NOAA , NASA, the Hadley center and many more original sources. Their data and discussion 
Is to me,  fairly irrefutable, documented and vetted-to-death proof of the fact that the planet is getting warmer and  that the change is largely anthropogenic in nature. You can start with wikipedia and dive into the sources..10 minutes worth is sufficient. 
In every other respect, respectfully, Richard Stanley
Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 28, 2014, at 19:27, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com> wrote:

Dear Dean
 
>I do not see how linking together your two outlier beliefs that stove testing is wrong and climate change is wrong strengthens either case.
The great majority of scientists involved in both fields disagree with you.
 
Topic 1: Climate
 
The end of this month marks at least 17 full years without a statistically detectable change in the average temperature of the planet. Some say 18 years, some say it is 21.  That is, the temperature of the globe, on average, is the same now as it was in September 1996.
 
Recently, in the New York Times, International edition, yet another an unsigned article predicting global catastrophe caused by anthropogenic CO2 emissions appeared reciting the meme that the temperature of the earth 'continues to rise'. This claim is patently false, as anyone can see by looking at the (multiple) temperature records available on line.
 
My position: It is a better to be an 'outlier' that an outright liar.
 
Topic 2: Stove testing
 
The lab test method used by the UNFCCC and the (different) lab test method referenced in the IWA 2012:11 which, in anonymously edited and undocumented form, is now being promoted as suitable for the ISO but it cannot predict the performance of a stove in use. The claim is made that the method reports the specific fuel consumption and the specific emission rates for CO and PM2.5. It does none of these and what numbers it does produce, have a high coefficient of variation.  There are other test methods available which reasonably predict performance in use, as well as CO and PM2.5 emission rates with much lower coefficients of variation. 
 
My position: It is a better to be an 'outlier' that an outright liar.
 
The beauty of science is that in the end real scientists defer to evidence.
 
I propose that we test a few stoves in typical use by householders and compare three lab test methods: the GACC’s WBT 4.2.2 (not 4.2.3 because it has had its tab in 4.2.2 with the record of changes deleted so we have no idea what formulas have been altered), the EPTP used by Envirofit and the CSI-WHT used by the World Bank.
 
With these three lab tests and the actual emissions and fuel consumption measured using a validated and mutually agreed method, we will be able to report which lab test method gives a performance rating that is the most accurate, which is the outlier and which is the outright liar. Similarly, we can assess the coefficients of variation and assign them to those same categories.
 
Regards
Crispin
_______________________________________________
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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20140929/5aaeab62/attachment.html>