[Stoves] LPG Stove Webinar and Haiti stoves activities....(referred to in Re: Clarifications)
Paul Anderson
psanders at ilstu.edu
Sat Dec 17 23:42:17 CST 2016
Ron and Stovers,
Ron's message below has his comments about my report on the LPG stove
webinar (but he used the Subject line of a different message, so I have
changed back to the LPG stove webinar Subject line.
I thank Ron for his thoughtful comments.
Ron asked specifically about the Canadian-funded initiative for
cookstoves in Haiti. The basic info is from the GACC on 5 pages at:
https://cleancookstoves.org/binary-data/RESOURCE/file/000/000/476-1.pdf
That was written in about June 2016.
Of interest in that document are the following lines:
> In FAQ 2: ....The use of solid fuels also results in a range of
> climate-damaging emissions
> In FAQ 3. ....thus the substitution of clean fuels is expected to
> result in a net climate benefit. The application of robust stove
> standards and testing protocols is expected to shift the market to
> better cooking technologies and cleaner fuels. .....
> .... and will improve livelihoods through lower expenditures for solid
> fuel for cooking...
> In FAQ 4. .... • Strengthen the supply of clean and efficient
> cookstoves and clean fuels by improving inclusive value chains...
> In FAQ 13. Such an assessment may include the expected climate
> impacts or benefits from the use of particular fuels recommended under
> the initiative ;
Sounds sweet and neutral, but it is blackballing of solid fuels
(particularly wood) and the promotion of "clean fuels." WE on the
SToves Listserv know that fuels are not dirty. But the writers of the
FAQ page about Haiti evidently do not. I suspect that the LPG
advocates have a heavy hand in these statements. LPG is planning (as
announced on the LPG stove Webinar) a major push into Haiti.
Did someone read that the GACC is neutral about stove technology and
stove fuels???? I hope that the Canadians are real careful about what
they let others do with their money.
Also,
> In FAQ 7. .... across our diverse partner base, including over 54
> national government partners,....
Really???? 54???? Some influencial contacts in Haiti might question
that statement.
> Also in FAQ 7: If your organization is activelyworking in Haiti and
> would like to stay informed of the Alliance’s efforts there, please
> ensure that this is reflected in your partner profile in our online
> partner directory
We know of some (including myself) who have been listed for years as
GACC Partners working in Haiti who were not even informed of this new
initiative, and were left out of meetings in Haiti. And whose requests
for minutes or drafts or other information about the past 6 months of
planning have yielded zero information. (see next item)
> 10.WHAT IS THE TIMING FOR THE INITIATIVE?
> TheAlliance began work on the scoping and mapping activities in June
> 2016.The plan is expected to be completed by January2017.
It is now into the holiday season of Dec. And the expected completion
is by January (next month). Really??? Maybe the planners have all
the inputs that they think that they need.
This message is going to Stovers Listserv and also specifically to the
Haiti coordinator for the GACC activities in Haiti, and higher GACC
personnel.
*********************
Also:
Since June, the GACC released:
Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves
Haiti Cookstoves and Fuels Market Assessment
Preliminary Report
I have a .pdf copy (4 MB), and cannot find the source document on the
Internet / GACC website. If you and others cannot find it, please let
me know. It is a very informative document, but I cannot give you the
link to it at this time.
(And do read Ron's comments below about the LPG stove webinar.)
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 12/17/2016 4:58 PM, Ronal W. Larson wrote:
> Paul et al:
>
> I agree with all you have added. Here I only want to thank you
> (tardily) for the little bit of your message that I have NOT excised
> (and then also personally try to add to (as you have requested) the
> good report you gave). See more below.
>
>
>> On Dec 17, 2016, at 2:09 PM, Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu
>> <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>> wrote:
>>
>> Ron and Nikhil and Crispin and others,
>>
>> <snip two lines>
>
>> I do note that not a single person sent any message about my summary
>> of the LPG-stoves webinar. I thought that the data about subsidies
>> etc and not reaching the truly impoverished in sustainable ways would
>> get some reaction. No problem. That topic is over.
>
> *[RWL: I apologize for not saying thanks right away. I don’t think
> many will mind if I reopen the topic. I only heard the last part of
> the webinar, and hoped to get back to it when it was released. So
> here is what you said on the 15th (that I have italicized for
> clarity). I am commenting only where I hope to add something new.*
>
> /Comments: (forgive me if my notes are faulty, but I think I am
> saying things correctly.)
> 1. ---- Not a nice word said about biomass/solid fuels. To be
> expected. Not a complaint. They were advocating / "selling" LPG.
>
> 2. The industry association (WLPGA) has 250 members and 1.4 million
> employees. ---- I calculate that to be 5600 employees per member.
> Wow. GACC has 1600 partners, many with 5 or fewer employees (many
> who are the owners). LPG is BIG business and has deep pockets. /
> /
> /
> //*[RWL2: I don’t have the time now to prove this, but am sure we can
> find climate denial funding coming from this Association. *
>
> 3. Section on Women in LPG was about hiring more females. VERY few
> women in LPG activities (not counting the cooks). ---- This is PR
> work that makes sense. Not a complaint. Just a comment.
>
> 4. In the world, LPG has 3 billion consumers. (accept that as a
> fact). (next might not be correctly noted: wanting to reach one
> billion (poor) people by 2030. ------ To me that says 5 people per
> household would be 200 million households. Admirable. But there are
> 500 million households with needs for clean cookstoves. So that
> looks like claiming 40% of the NEED to be taken care of by LPG.
> Wonderful. That will be mainly the more affluent of the needy
> people, not the BOP (Base of the Pyramid). So that leaves 60% to be
> handled by the other stove technologies. All of that is fine with me
> IF (big IF) LPG was not sucking up so much of the subsidy money and if
> LPG was not carbon positive. Being carbon neutral is harder to do.
> And being carbon NEGATIVE is even harder, but is done by the
> char-making TLUD stoves, that are NOT getting subsidies and do not
> need imported fuels.
> /
> /
> //*[RWL4: I spend a majority of my time these days on a list
> called “Geoengineering” - particularly hot right now as we are
> discussing a just-ended major COP (Conference of Parties) meeting in
> Cancun (Mexico) on CBD (the Convention on Biodiversity). I am still
> learning, but presume there was not much favorable said there about
> LPG. My impression on the handling of biochar (to be produced via
> TLUDs and many other ways) was appreciably better than earlier by the
> CBD. See this document: *
> *https://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/cbd-ts-84-en.pdf *
> *The word “biochar” appears 149 times - many excellent new cites -
> especially a large number from 2016. There are a few places I would
> quibble about - but a big improvement over previous CBD documents on
> biochar. No mention at all of LPG, but 88 uses of “fossil” and almost
> 1200 on “climate”. *
> *The point perhaps is that this LPG-oriented study has failed to be
> thinking of where the world is moving
> *
> 5. Also made a comment that LPG is "Low GHG." Nothing more said
> about that. /——/
> //*[RWL5: When you are trying to go negative, every bit counts.
> Until we have net negative emissions, the global temperatures will
> continue to rise. My perception is that Kirk Smith believes this “low”
> is justified by the averted DALY’s. I think he and many are not
> including the potential for carbon negativity capabilities of TLUDs
> - which also have positive health benefits. But even more critical
> could be the cost reversal potential as biochar receives carbon
> credits in the future (I hope). Women in need of stretching limited
> funds could well choose to use an income-generating stove over one
> with an expensive, supposedly safer fuel.*
>
> 6. Three countries named:
> A. Brazil is 95% connected for LPG. (That is "availability".)
> ------- No mention of cost/benefits or subsidy. Success story.
>
> B. India is getting started. Later comments mention 67% penetration
> / access, ----- because households in or near urban areas where
> LPG is sold somewhere . Access means COULD get an LPG tank. Seeking
> massive LPG _coverage_ in the next 3 years. That could be
> distribution so that access is possible, and not about actual usage.
>
> C. Indonesia. The numbers I copied down were: 57 million
> household are already in the LPG user-camp, and that the subsidy money
> to do that was US$ 14.6 BILLION. Nothing more was said. ------ So
> I submitted a comment/question that will have its answer when the
> webinar (and answered questions) are available for everyone. Check my
> math, but $14,600 Millions divided by 57 Millions is $256 SUBSIDY PER
> HOUSEHOLD. Ouch!!!! That does not seem possible.
> //*[RWL6: I hope this included some data gathering on the health
> impacts. It wouldn’t surprise me that such subsidies could be a good
> investment from a DALY perspective - so I hope someone reading this
> can comment on this payback question. Poor health is a terrible drain
> on national economies. But as we have been learning - a good stove in
> an otherwise unhealthy environment is not going to do much.*
>
> This data needs verification. I do not want to start any "fake
> news". And who got this money? Maybe there are "factors" in
> calculating the subsidy, such as counting things that maybe could be
> left off of the costs.
>
> But even at half ($128) that would be a massive subsidy per stove.
>
> And this raises the question of what is in the works already for India
> which is more than 4 times larger in population than Indonesia. Some
> sort of cost/benefit analysis might be appropriate.
> *[RWL6: I’ll try to return to these important details after listening
> to all of the webinar. (and applies to all your questions)*
>
> /7. The importance of the role of government in the provision of
> stove policies (and regulations about LPG importation and
> handling/distribution) was emphasized by the speakers. —— Certainly
> a correct statement, and the big-business LPG companies have much more
> contact and impact than do the little guys. /
> //*[RWL7. Two personal hopes - a) climate change concerns could drown
> out the fossil companies; b) making money while you cook could
> entirely offset LPG interests. And a) and b) can be related - and
> there are not many options to a needy housewife as attractive to
> budgets as TLUDs.*/
> /
> 8. There was a section on LPG in humanitarian aid, specifically
> mentioning refugee camps. Presentation spoke poorly of "Traditional
> fuels". One presentation spoke about the provision of LPG to refugee
> camps that are occupied for many years and are likely to remain in
> place for more years. The presenters suggestion for consideration is
> that maybe the camps should have LPG piped in instead of trucking in
> the LPG canisters. ------
>
> 9. A very interesting segment of the presentation was about Haiti.
> Many very good statistics.
> A. Very low LPG infrastructure and usage at present.
>
> B. 4800 schools (institutional cooking, maybe including orphanages?)
> in Haiti, of which 143 so far have LPG services. Price of
> installation (equipment, etc) is US$900 for the basic and up to $5000
> for the larger more complete kitchen conversions. Capacity for
> conversions to LPG was stated to be 1500 per year. Mentioned fuel cost
> SAVINGS because the cost of charcoal in Haiti is so high that LPG
> could be sold at higher prices and still be competitive.
>
> C. Discussion of street vendors using LPG ------ (which makes sense
> to me).
>
> D. For household (HH) stoves, the LPG target is 10,000 for low income
> HH. Have done 1150 thus far. Cost is $100 for the economy version
> and $160 for the premium version. ----- Haiti has about 2 million
> households, so there is no talk of covering 40% of those households
> with LPG.
>
> E. How to fund these LPG products? Utilize the money of the 400,000
> Haitians who live in the USA (and more in other countries) who send
> remittences to Haiti to support their relatives, etc. Called
> "Diaspora" Haitians. Mentioned making contact with the main
> Haitian-in-USA TV station to spread the word.
>
> F. ------ No mention of the Canadian government 50 million dollar
> commitment to improve stoves in Haiti, but I am sure that LPG entities
> have their eyes on a hefty chunk of those funds. Still in the
> planning stages until January 2017
> *[RWL: Can you give a cite on these Canadian dollars?*
>
> ***************************
> So much of this presentation was marketing. Fair enough. The survey
> of the attendees showed that most (80+%??) were involved with some
> business aspect of LPG (or were considering it). Only a few (such as
> me) marked "Other" as the reason for attending. I wanted to know
> about the LPG cookstove approach. The session was highly
> informative. Thanks to the presenters and to EPA and Winrock for
> making available important information.
>
> I wonder if this topic will be discussed on the Stoves Listserv. I
> hope so.
>
> Paul
> /
> /
> //*[RWL_end: Me too (re discussion). *
> *
> *
> * Again - thanks and apologies for my too-delayed response. We all
> should be reporting on information opportunities like this - and
> Winrock (Elisa Derby) / EPA (John Mitchell) (on behalf of PCIA and
> now GACC) deserve a lot of credit for this series (the last was the
> excellent one featuring Michael Johnson and Ajay [a cc, whose recent
> doctoral thesis I have complimented] that explained their new model
> and coupling with DALYs)*
> *
> *
> *I just checked at *http://www.pciaonline.org/webinars, *and this
> December webinar was not yet up - but I recommend (again) listening to
> Michael and Ajay and others on their November similar (?) webinar.*
>
> Ron
>
>
>> <snip lots>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20161217/403d24e7/attachment.html>
More information about the Stoves
mailing list