[Stoves] Regenerative Capitalism (Jock Gill)

Thu Jun 4 01:02:43 CDT 2015

By the way have any of you been following the progress of the 9.2billion
Nira stove distribution project that is ongoing in Nigeria - (some amazing
photos here from this excellent NGO (Aptly named 'Follow the Money' -
https://www.facebook.com/followthemoneyng).

It seems to be generating quite alot of controversy -
 http://www.punchng.com/opinion/the-fraud-called-clean-cookstoves/
<http://www.punchng.com/opinion/the-fraud-called-clean-cookstoves/> and
also Nigeria: How Graft Stalled Distribution of N9.3 Billion Clean Cook
Stoves <http://allafrica.com/stories/201505201261.html> about why, how and
which stoves will be distributed.

It seems that in this case the voices of 750,000 cooks are not as well
heard as the voice of a certain Mrs Lawrencia Laraba-Mallam
(Min. Environment).

Does anyone know where all this cash came from?

Best regards,

Teddy

*Cookswell Jikos*
www.cookswell.co.ke
www.facebook.com/CookswellJikos
www.kenyacharcoal.blogspot.com
Mobile: +254 700 380 009
Mobile: +254 700 905 913
P.O. Box 1433, Nairobi 00606, Kenya

Save trees - think twice before printing.

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Frank Shields <franke at cruzio.com> wrote:

> Dear Dean,
>
> Now thats a lot of “cooks’!
>
> Seems a lot like the groups i experienced with the composting groups made
> up of scientist, farmers, regulators, composters, sales etc. Nothing ever
> got accomplished as we would just argue back and force. Key, I’ve
> concluded, is to have a leader that keeps the group on a path of getting
> something brought to a conclusion. And that never happened. I hope your
> group is better.
>
> The report by Baldwin I have downloaded but, for some reason, the .gif
> files did not come through. They seem important as they contain equations.
> I’m sure the report must be dated but I will take a look at what I have.
> Thanks.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Frank
>
>
>
>
>
> Frank Shields
> franke at cruzio.com
>
>
> On Jun 3, 2015, at 4:36 PM, Dean Still <deankstill at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Frank,
>
> No, the stove design information is needed from many equally important
> sources and hopefully adds up to the evolution of a successful product. In
> India we had cooks, distributors, manufacturers, funders, engineers,
> retailers, and community representatives on the stove design committee. The
> committee designs the product, oversees the development and the long term
> growth of the project.
>
> Each constituency has different perspectives, as you can imagine. Many
> types of tests, including sales,etc. are used that give information to the
> committee. This was outlined by Baldwin in "Biomass Stoves", 1987.
>
> Best,
>
> Dean
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Frank Shields <franke at cruzio.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Dean,
>>
>>
>> Very interesting.  So its the distributer that communicate to you, the
>> designer, what the cook wants? I can understand the limitations on cost and
>> weight, size etc. but to have little contact with the cook on these other
>> decisions I would think that could create some misinformation. Perhaps that
>> is why so many stoves in the past have been turned into flower pots?
>> Distributors playing a big part in these decisions - I never would have
>> guessed.
>>
>> Well I am just pigeon holed into the testing sectioned. :)
>>
>> re-done…
>>
>> 1) The cook tells the distributor what they want.
>>>>
>>> 2) The designer makes the stove  do what the distributor wants.
>>>> 3) The lab helps the designer with gap measurements, suggested
>>>> materials that will work the best etc.
>>>> 4) The lab tests all the stoves for the purpose of determining the ones
>>>> that will work best for the distributor at a site.
>>>> 5) The finished stove that will do what the distributor requests will
>>>> come with instructions and, perhaps, a recipe book to be delivered. Then
>>>> the individual skills of the cooks take over.
>>>>
>>>
>> If the process is such we deal directly with the distributor them it may
>> be necessary to bring the cooks in at the end to verify the distributor got
>> it right.
>>
>>
>>
>>>> Regards
>>
>> Frank
>>
>>
>> Frank Shields
>> franke at cruzio.com
>>
>>
>> On Jun 3, 2015, at 11:25 AM, Dean Still <deankstill at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Frank,
>>
>> I think that it's very important to add the distributor to the list when
>> thinking about creating a new stove. The distributor, from the very start,
>> helps to define the product and adds a lot of 'reality' to the process. In
>> India, we met with a group of distributors to learn about what they could
>> sell and their inputs were extremely important in the development process.
>> They said that the stove needed to cost less than 5 dollars, that a woman
>> needed to carry two of them a mile to her home, and that 2,000 needed to
>> fit on a truck.
>>
>> I would get the distributor on the team before doing the other work.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Dean
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Frank Shields <franke at cruzio.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Crispin and Stovers,
>>>
>>> Crispin writes:
>>>
>>> Which is the most important, the most significant, the most influential
>>> factor creating the final products? The cook.
>>>
>>>
>>> The process goes like this:
>>>
>>> 1) The cook tells the stove designer what they want.
>>>
>> 2) The designer makes the stove to do what the cook wants.
>>> 3) The lab helps the designer with gap measurements, suggested materials
>>> that will work the best etc.
>>> 4) The lab tests all the stoves for the purpose of determining the ones
>>> that will work best for the cooks at a site.
>>> 5) The finished stove that will do what the cook requests will come with
>>> instructions and, perhaps, a recipe book. Then the individual skills of the
>>> cooks take over.
>>>
>>> The only job of the cook is to tell the designer what they want. Then
>>> all is left to the designer and the lab (scientist) to make what the cook
>>> wants. If the cook likes the stove the process went well.  If we bring the
>>> cook into the picture after they have told the designer what they want then
>>> we are bringing in another -huge- unnecessary variable we must get control
>>> of. To get control of it we will need lots of cooks (N values) to use in
>>> testing each of the stoves being developed.
>>>
>>> If the final product fails or is not widely accepted by the cooks then
>>> it means there was a lack of communication between the cook and the
>>> designer. Perhaps the cook likes food cooked in a smoky environment. Then
>>> the designer must design a stove where that will happen in a safe manner.
>>> But if we bring the cooks back into the testing part of stove development
>>> we make the process unmanageable and a lot of stove designers will have
>>> stoves that will not see the light of day.    To be able to keep the cooks
>>> out of the process after they have told the designer what they want we need
>>> do a lot of work on Step 4 above. And that process starts with
>>> understanding the biomass they use as fuel.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Frank
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Frank Shields
>>> franke at cruzio.com
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 31, 2015, at 12:07 PM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <
>>> crispinpigott at outlook.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Stovers and Discussants (if you are not stovers)
>>>
>>> Samer indirectly asks if this: “…centric approach serves the 'poor' or
>>> the 'environment'.”
>>>
>>> Consider this: steel sheeting is made without no anticipation of the
>>> products that will be formed from it.
>>>
>>> A stove designer forms a product from steel sheets, limited by his or
>>> her understanding of what might be possible using it.
>>>
>>> Nature produces a variety of fuels with different properties and
>>> strengths with no concern as to what possible fire may consume them.
>>>
>>> A cook buys the stove and creates foods unimagined by the stove designer
>>> or the steel maker. The cook uses the fuels in ways unseen in natural
>>> fires. The cook makes the fire and the stove sing and dance, performing the
>>> required actions, producing the right amount of heat, light, and food.
>>>
>>> Which is the most important, the most significant, the most influential
>>> factor creating the final products? The cook. Without understanding the
>>> needs, desires, intentions and skills of the cooks, how is it possible to
>>> design a stove or fuel, or combination, that will do what is needed? It is
>>> not possible.
>>>
>>> Homogenizing the production and broadening the footprint of distribution
>>> of improved stoves carries great risks, mostly the risk of failure to
>>> adopt. Similarly the introduction of subsidized fuels has multiple intended
>>> and unintended consequences.
>>>
>>> With this in mind we should recognize there are two large scale agendas
>>> at work.
>>>
>>> The first is those who would replace the stoves with products that are
>>> far more efficient and flexible, attractive to own and worth investing in
>>> for comfort and pleasure with reduced PM and CO emissions and which make
>>> better use of the available energy carriers.
>>>
>>> The second is that group which seek to remove solid fuels altogether
>>> from the kitchen, promoting as they do and will, electricity, LPG, natural
>>> gas and light fraction liquid fuels.  Their byline is 'to provide clean
>>> cooking solutions to those who have traditionally been forced to burn solid
>>> fuels'.  The implication is that there are no 'clean-burning' solid fuels
>>> which rather sets their agenda against that of the first group.
>>>
>>> Old-timers may remember the contribution by Liz Bates (former editor of
>>> Boiling Point magazine) remarking on the improvement in the lives of cooks
>>> in Sudan who received subsidised LPG stoves and fuel. LPG is a wonderful
>>> solution to IAQ problems, but does LPG address all the social and material
>>> needs of the users of fire?
>>>
>>> Let's ask Cecil.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Crispin
>>>
>>> ===============
>>>
>>> Dear Jock,
>>>
>>> I found the article very stimulating. Of course, there is much that can
>>> be examined in terms of how the global stoves 'industry' is developing. For
>>> instance, if one examines the topics discussed at the ETHOS meetings year
>>> in and out, there are moments when clear shifts in what is being discussed
>>> (and who discusses) occur. As I read it, the broad trend has shifted from
>>> concerns of design, implementation, and marketing in context, to global
>>> markets (e.g. carbon credits, international testing standards, advocacy).
>>>
>>> This trajectory will have foreseeable benefits for energy-oriented
>>> bilateral agreements, mass manufacturers of stoves, NGOs/corporations that
>>> will tap into carbon offsets, and laboratories authorized to certify
>>> stoves, etc. Along with this is a strong *claim* that this global
>>> market-centric approach serves the 'poor' or the 'environment'.
>>>
>>> I wish to stay way from simple dichotomous arguments of global/local,
>>> top-down/bottom-up, standardized/pluralism, or laboratory/field, but
>>> certainly the 'regenerative capitalism' approach you suggest might demand a
>>> reconsideration of this trend towards standardization, scale, and
>>> donor-driven markets? What alternatives might your approach suggest?
>>>
>>> Your thoughts on this matter are appreciated!
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Samer
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150604/437e1c14/attachment.html>