[Stoves] KG and TJ stoves ....... was Re: report with dissapointing results from cleaner cookstoves

Sat Dec 10 22:21:00 CST 2016

Sorry Paul, it is not convenient.

That is really a drop box for projects.

Look for anything that ends in .jpg

You can sort the files by clicking on the top bar by TYPE (or size, etc).

There a couple of photos in each folder showing the versions produced by the artisans.

I'll ask Jeremy about loading some thumbnails.
Crispin

Crispin,

Please assist me and others to "see" your stoves more easily.   I lose
the stove because of the parts (the forest is not seen because of the
trees).  I request that either you identify by number the 3 or 4 best
files to look at for each stove,
OR
please put together one "page" (file) with several images on it.

Thanks,

Paul

Doc  /  Dr TLUD  /  Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email:  psanders at ilstu.edu
Skype:   paultlud    Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website:  www.drtlud.com

On 12/10/2016 6:17 PM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott wrote:
> Dear Roger
>
> Thanks for little update and link. I want to express support for your general approach to promoting stoves that can be afforded and produced 'locally'. This is what is happening in the two winter heating pilots we (WB) are running in Kyrgyzstan KG and Tajikistan TJ.
>
> I want to give a brief update on ‎KG but first should explain the projects are not linked. They are run by different teams, different leaders, different budgets, different size. The commonality is the models of stoves (5) being promoted.
>
> The models are all on my website as they are in the public domain.  As they are perfected, the drawings are updated. Searchers will notice that there are sets of drawings on both the KG and TJ sections of the site www.newdawnengineering.com /Library /Stoves. They are not quite identical. Check the TJ Model 4 for the latest version of that unit.
>
> The reason for small differences is local skill levels. The ones on the TJ section can be made with only an angle grinder and arc welder. A hammer would help.
>
> I received a field report from KG yesterday. ‎They have been installing Model 4's which I referred to previously. As in Roger's case, they are made from locally available materials and use local skill levels and equipment. In KG that means we have the luxury of requiring, for the pilot, that all the parts are cut using a CNC plasma cutter or a plasma cutter using a pattern. Parts are produced by two firms. Multiple producers can thus make perfect (predictable) products without design drift.
>
> The feedback from these space heating and cooking stoves ‎is:
>
> They light with 1/10th of the wood needed by a traditional stove.
> They burn 13 instead of 23 kg of coal per day.
> They heat two rooms to a modern level of comfort‎ (measured 24 C) with that much-reduced fuel consumption. The old stoves could not heat two adjacent rooms, just one of them.
> The stove cooks much better / faster than the traditional ones, some of which could not boil water at all.
> There is no smoke at all in the home or visible from the chimney except during ignition.
> They heat the home throughout the night, a first for these home owners.
> The neighbours are coming around trying to find out where to get one and how much they cost.
>
> This is the same Model 4 being tested in detail at CAU in Beijing. I believe there are now at least seven tests which show that once the fire is established and the pyrolysis going well, they have net negative emissions of PM2.5 thereafter.
>
> These models are completely within the understanding of the local producers, and cost half of what we paid in Mongolia to bring in high performance TLUD's from Turkey.
>
> It is this sort of disruptive technology that is needed to reach the billions of stove users in Asia - locally produced, transformative‎, self-selling stoves that are appreciated on merit. People are going to line up to buy these, big and heavy as they are, because they deliver what the customer wants.
>
> For those who want to see a reduction in CO2, mercury, fluoride, ‎lead and the other, a reduction of (1-13/23) has been achieved in every home with one of these installed. That is a 43% reduction. Everyone should be happy.
>
> If we achieve better performance and a 43% reduction in fuel consumption by those who are living in energy poverty, and do it under their own control, we will rapidly achieve a target of reaching 100m homes.
>
> Regards
> Crispin
>
>
>
>
> Roger,
>
> REAP-Canada seems to have worked with GACC, at least for a time, so maybe you can enlighten us. I don’t see how a stove developer or supplier on this list can have any input on GACC research, development or demonstration. Who suggests or reviews GACC RD&D? I see several high level administrators on the GACC team but I only recognize one stove supplier/developer. Most of us can't afford to attend GACC meetings. Maybe Richard, Radha, or Ranyee can explain how the good ideas from this discussion, or from the ETHOS meetings, can be channeled to GACC and what the mechanisms are for review and monitoring the GACC work program. Ranyee has occasionally explained the GACC position on certain topics but I don’t know that we have had any input in the process.
>
> We do have an impact. I got a call this year to suggest that this list be shut down. Somebody didn't like the criticism and "misinformation". So I suspect that people involved in funding stove development projects monitor the list.  I refused to shut the list down. As the sole sponsor and owner I prefer to let you people work things out online without being rude. If you insist on being rude then take it offline.
>
> At ETHOS we discussed the need for health studies for years.  This year we should discuss the GACC health projects. How are health studies and projects developed and carried out within GACC? Who reviews them? I don't see any critical reviews on the website or social media.
>
> This discussion group and ETHOS participants have spent years working on various aspects of stoves, household energy, and health. We have contributed a lot of time and money to improve the health and welfare of communities in developing and developed countries. After years of individual development and collective discussions we participated in the creation of ETHOS. Then in 2002 (?) we supported the launch of the Partnership in Clean Indoor Air (PCIA).  In 2010 we all volunteered significant time in working groups to develop priorities for GACC. Many of us are GACC "partners". GACC claims 1600 "partners". Later it was explained to me that the only interaction we would have was through competitive GACC contracts.
>
> How can we help this process? What are the current mechanisms for those in the field to participate in GACC planning and development, or are there any?
>
> Tom
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Roger Samson
> Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2016 6:46 AM
> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] report with dissapointing results from cleaner cookstoves (Crispin)
>
>
> Here are a few snip-bits from the GACC web site:
>
> http://cleancookstoves.org/technology-and-fuels/standards/defining-clean-and-efficient.html
> "Note that Tier 4 is always the highest performing and most likely to achieve the greatest health or environment benefits".
> "For example, some of the Alliance’s activities are not restricted to the Tiers defined above, some activities are even more restrictive.  Alliance partners also have a broad range of goals. In order to reach 100 million households with a sustained level of adoption, our approach is to support a wide range of activities, while also raising the bar on stove performance over time as the sector matures".
>
> Does everybody understand how they are focussed on activities (specifically large numbers of advanced technology stoves) and not managing for health outcomes or financial benefits to communities.
>
> The main dedicated biomass users are in rural areas if you examine individual country household surveys.
> If GACC were managing for improved health outcomes of people the simplest low cost program they could do is focus on rural areas in the tropics to encourage stoves that are suitable for outdoor use and encourage outdoor kitchens.  There is minimal exposure to the cook or her family as particles readily disperse before they hit the breathing area of the user as well they do not continuously circulate as in poorly ventilated indoor kitchens. I think understanding of particle dispersion is lacking.
>
> So you do not need elaborate financially unsustainable Tier 3 or 4 stoves to do this. You do not need to import stoves from outside a country.
>
> REAP-Canada is managing for health outcomes by supporting locally made clay brick stoves that can be used outdoors within a simple well ventilated outdoor kitchen.
> http://reap-canada.com/online_library/IntDev/Brochure%20-%20REAP%20Noflay%20Clay%20Brick%20Stove.pdf
>
> The improved stoves are made with local materials, skills and knowledge.  Our stoves don’t have a place in GACC’s money burn on Tier Technology that is essentially making developing countries reliant on imported technologies (with the benefits going to the more advanced country).
>
> The reality is GACC is effectively doing a shotgun money burn on activities because they aren’t following good development practice and managing for outcomes through results based management.
>
> Roger Samson
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/