[Stoves] Quick comment on developing international standards -- RE: [stove] Comparison of stove testing procedures
Paul Anderson
psanders at ilstu.edu
Wed Mar 23 10:14:50 CDT 2016
Dear John (and Kirk and all),
I am not an expert on stove testing techniques, but my stove designs
have undergone high quality quantitative testing of CO, PM, emissions,
etc since 2005. Test-results are certainly useful. And I have visited
at least 6 locations around the world that utilize high quality testing
equipment.
But there is a big difference between having "test-results" that help us
make improvements and having "test-standards" for whatever reasons they
are desired.
I commend all of those hard workers who are trying to have ISO standards
and "Working Group 2" results. However,
1. This road seems to be long thus far and that there seems to be a
very very long way to go.
2. And even when there would be some final agreements, will they have
much impact on or implementation by cookstove makers? Stove makers
include modern businesses with balance sheets and budgets, and also many
many more small-shop artisans.
3. And there also is the ultimate issue of stove-acceptance by the
users, and that includes the realities of being able to afford
cookstoves that can meet standards.
4. All the rules in the world will not necessarily assist impoverished
remote people who continue to position three-stones under their pots.
Basically, I am an very optimistic person. But my optimism for the
advancement of cookstoves does not include much focus on the development
of international standards for stoves.
Those people who are strong supporters of international standards for
stoves will certainly be able to cite reasons to justify the time and
the substantial money to create the standards. First they need to get
to that stage. And then we can see about implementation and impact on
stove making. And then finally, (many years from now) we might be able
to evaluate those efforts and expenditures.
For now, I work to help stove designs comply with good test results, and
I observe and wish-well for those doing the standards.
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 3/23/2016 8:23 AM, Kirk R. Smith wrote:
>
> I have passed these comments on to my Chinese colleagues who have
> these concerns. I might add, however, that the work presented in the
> paper, which is part of the thesis of the first author supervised by
> Prof Tao, the senior author, supports the benefits of such
> international efforts that engage the most knowledgeable independent
> stakeholders. A peer-reviewed article with empirical measurements
> would, I should think, be a welcome bit of information informing that
> process along with many other inputs to be considered.
>
> Perhaps China, having had its own methods in place longer than any
> other country, can be excused a bit for concerns that methods and
> standards being proposed are suited to conditions there. Also, please
> keep in mind that journal articles take some time to come out and
> information about such international activities may not reach everyone
> in every sector for some time as well. And that China is a big place
> – not everyone engaged in stoves will know each other or be equally
> connected to efforts elsewhere.
>
> I am sure no insult was intended about ongoing efforts, which indeed
> are welcomed by all of us/k
>
> p.s. As this subject is fairly arcane to most readers of this
> listserver, which has been promised to its recipients as just that,
> i.e., not a blog with back and forth exchanges, can I suggest that
> those interested in this subject go “offline”. I am happy to be
> involved in future emails directed to those with specific interest.
> Thanks very much.
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:57 AM, Mitchell, John <Mitchell.John at epa.gov
> <mailto:Mitchell.John at epa.gov>> wrote:
>
> Paul,
>
> Thanks for forwarding Kirk Smith’s email with the abstract on a
> “Comparison of International and Chinese water boiling test protocols.”
>
> However, given your comment “/It seems that some entities in the
> international leadership of clean cookstoves might be pushing for one
> test without sufficient attention to alternative testing methods,/” I
> want to remind you, and inform others on the distribution lists, about
> two things:
>
> 1.how the ISO technical committee (TC285) working to develop voluntary
> international standards operates; and
>
> 2.how Working Group #2 – which is charged with developing laboratory
> testing methods, is moving forward.
>
> ISO Technical Committee 285 (TC285) currently has 28 countries
> participating, and 14 observing, with 10 international organization
> participating as well. Here in the US, many of our colleagues are
> engaged in the activities of TC285. We have 99 people from 63
> organizations participating in the US Technical Advisory Group – with
> 33 experts participating in the four TC285 working groups. All this
> is to say – /the some entities in the international leadership of
> clean cookstoves/ – _is us_. It is your colleagues in the US and
> around the world – we are the international leadership developing
> testing methods – it is not just one person or one organization who is
> the international leader. In fact, the chairperson of TC 285, the
> chairs of the national committees, and the conveners and project
> leaders of all the working groups, are responsible for staying neutral
> and not pushing a specific idea. In addition, these leaders are
> responsible for ensuring everyone has an opportunity to be heard and
> to facilitate a constructive discussion to bring different
> perspectives together. Also, it is important to note that each
> country gets one vote. So all the people on the USTAG have merge our
> perspectives into one, and that the USTAG’s vote is just one vote out
> of 28.
>
> In addition to keeping all participants in the USTAG informed and
> engaged, EPA and Winrock, with the support of the Global Alliance and
> the participation of TC285 leaders from Germany, Nepal, South Africa,
> and Uganda, have worked to keep all interested parties from around the
> world informed and engaged on TC285 activities, hosting a webinar on
> December 14^th to update folks on the progress at the TC285 meeting in
> Accra that preceded the Forum. That webinar can be found at
> http://www.pciaonline.org/webinarsAdditionally, you will recall that
> there was a session at the January ETHOS Conference where we had
> representatives from each of the working groups report on their
> progress to date and upcoming plans
>
> Regarding developing laboratory testing methods, Working Group 2 is
> moving forward on two tracks:
>
> -Part I is a “Standard [laboratory] test sequence for emissions and
> performance, safety, and durability” which has reached the committee
> draft stage. In fact the voting on the committee draft has just
> concluded and the working group will soon be meeting to review 68
> pages of comments – showing how engaged the international community is
> in developing this test sequence. The purpose of Part I is to provide
> a standard test sequence to establish international comparability in
> measurements of cookstove emissions and efficiency. There is a lot of
> flexibility within the standard test sequence as well – an option to
> test at just one or two power levels (versus all three), a plancha
> option, fuels, pots, etc. So that the standard test sequence still
> wouldn’t have everyone doing the exact same thing.
>
> -Part II is a “Contextual [laboratory] test sequence” which will be
> used for comparability within particular demographic settings. The
> idea is to attempt to replicate local field conditions, as much as
> practical, in the lab. Part II is in the early draft stage.
>
> If you, or anyone copied on this email would like to be engaged in
> developing testing methods, I strongly encourage you to contact your
> country’s standards development agency. In the US that is the
> American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the contact is Rachel
> Hawthorne, and she can be reached at rhawthorne at ansi.org
> <mailto:rhawthorne at ansi.org> Folks outside the US can also contact
> Rachel and she can direct you the standards development agency in your
> country. If anyone has questions about TC285 generally or about the
> USTAG, please contact me at mitchell.john at epa.gov
> <mailto:mitchell.john at epa.gov>
>
> All the best,
>
> John
>
> *From:* stove-bounces at lists.berkeley.edu
> <mailto:stove-bounces at lists.berkeley.edu>
> [mailto:stove-bounces at lists.berkeley.edu
> <mailto:stove-bounces at lists.berkeley.edu>] *On Behalf Of *Paul Anderson
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 17, 2016 9:22 PM
> *To:* stove at lists.berkeley.edu <mailto:stove at lists.berkeley.edu>;
> Stoves and biofuels network <Stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
> <mailto:Stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>>
> *Subject:* Re: [stove] Comparison of stove testing procedures
>
> Stovers,
>
> Below is the abstract of a significant comparative study done in
> China. We thank Kirk Smith and his Stove list (different from
> StoveS) for the information.
>
> Spoiler alert: Here is the punch line from the abstract:
>
> Statistically significant differences
>
> between the two [China and Internatonal WBT] protocols indicate
> the need for further efforts in emission tests and methodology
> development
>
> before the release of a well-accepted international testing protocol.
>
>
> Yes. Should we be surprised. It seems that some entities in the
> international leadership of clean cookstoves might be pushing for one
> test without sufficient attention to alternative testing methods.
>
> Note (in abstract) that:
>
> With longer burning duration and higher
>
> power, the Chinese WBT had statistically higher efficiencies, gas
> temperature, and lower pollutant emissions
>
>
> Sure!!! Change the duration and power, expect different test results!!!
>
> What is clear to me is that there should never be only one set of
> tests. People around the world have very different ways of cooking.
> High power in China, plancha stoves in Central America, two-arm
> cooking of thick foods in parts of Africa, long-simmering bean-meals
> vs. quick boil of rice meals, and on and on. The people we are
> trying to serve want solutions that are appropriate for their
> circumstances.
>
> Observation: There seems to be a slow-down in the seeking of stove
> testing at the major testing centers that have equipment. I can be
> shown to be incorrect if any testing centers would give us some
> statistics of numbers and types of tests that are being requested.
>
> Of course I like the importance of emissions testing because the TLUDs
> and other micro-gasifiers consistently give superior results. But
> most funding in the past has gone to less-qualified stoves.
>
> Paul
>
> Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
> Email:psanders at ilstu.edu <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>
> Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
> Website:www.drtlud.com <http://www.drtlud.com>
>
> On 3/17/2016 1:08 PM, Kirk R. Smith wrote:
>
> Can be downloaded from the website below/k
>
> Efficiencies and pollutant emissions from forced-draft
> biomass-pellet semi-gasifier stoves: Comparison of International
> and Chinese water boiling test protocols
>
> Yuanchen Chen, Guofeng Shen, Shu Su, Wei Du, Yibo Huangfu,
> Guangqing Liu, Xilong Wang, Baoshan Xing, Kirk R. Smith, Shu Tao
>
> Energy for Sustainable Development 32 (2016) 22–30
>
> Ab s t r a c t
>
> Biomass fuels are widely combusted in rural China, producing
> numerous air pollutants with great adverse
>
> impacts on human health. Some improved cookstoves and pellet fuels
> have been promoted. To evaluate the
>
> performance of pellet-gasifier stoves, efficiencies and pollutant
> emissions were measured following International
>
> and Chinese water boiling tests (WBTs). Compared with traditional
> stoves and unprocessed biomass fuels,
>
> increased efficiencies and lower emissions of pollutants including
> carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter
>
> (PM), parent and derivative polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
> (PAHs) were revealed for pellet-gasifier stoves.
>
> However, the calculated emission rates (ERs) of CO and PM2.5
> cannot meet the ER targets recently suggested
>
> by WHO indoor air quality guidelines (IAQGs). Better control of
> air mixing ratio and gross flow rates of primary
>
> and secondary air supply greatly reduced emissions and increased
> efficiencies. Differences among testing protocols
>
> are the key factors affecting the evaluation of stove performance.
> With longer burning duration and higher
>
> power, the Chinese WBT had statistically higher efficiencies, gas
> temperature, and lower pollutant emissions
>
> (p b 0.10) compared to those obtained through the International
> WBT. Statistically significant differences
>
> between the two protocols indicate the need for further efforts in
> emission tests and methodology development
>
> before the release of a well-accepted international testing protocol
>
> ---------------------------
> Kirk R. Smith, MPH, PhD
> Professor of Global Environmental Health
>
> Chair, Graduate Group in Environmental Health Sciences
> Director of the Global Health and Environment Program
> School of Public Health
> 747 University Hall
> University of California
> Berkeley, California, 94720-7360
> phone 1-510-643-0793; fax 642-5815
> krksmith at berkeley.edu <mailto:krksmith at berkeley.edu>
> http://www.kirkrsmith.org/
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this list go to:
>
> https://calmail.berkeley.edu/manage/list/reminder/stove@lists.berkeley.edu
>
> --
> This email was Virus checked by Astaro Security Gateway.
> http://www.sophos.com
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this list go to:
> https://calmail.berkeley.edu/manage/list/reminder/stove@lists.berkeley.edu
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this list go to:
> https://calmail.berkeley.edu/manage/list/reminder/stove@lists.berkeley.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160323/96ddd364/attachment.html>
More information about the Stoves
mailing list