[Stoves] Quick comment on developing international standards -- RE: [stove] Comparison of stove testing procedures

Fri Mar 25 06:56:20 CDT 2016

Excellent Dr. Kirk !
 Thanks with warm regardsBibhu Prasad Mohanty

CONFLICT FREE CONFIDENT LIFE:-http://www.facebook.com/groups/Conflictfreeconfidentlife

Linkedin Profile:-
http://www.linkedin.com/in/bibhuprasadmohanty  

AddressHIG-68, KV-5, Kalinga Vihar 
Patrapada, Bhubaneswar
Khurda Dist. 751019, Odisha, INDIA
Cell no:- +91 9437031912
Phone No:-+91 6742475129
Email:- bibhu65 at yahoo.com
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Let's not waste food, time, resources, labour, energy and opportunities in the process of making this world a place of peace, harmony and joy. We must be worthy of this beautiful EARTH and DIVINE and make our life meaningful. 

    On Wednesday, 23 March 2016 8:35 PM, Kirk R. Smith <krksmith at berkeley.edu> wrote:

 #yiv9936335808 #yiv9936335808 -- _filtered #yiv9936335808 {font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv9936335808 {font-family:Tahoma;panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;} _filtered #yiv9936335808 {font-family:Verdana;panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;} _filtered #yiv9936335808 {font-family:Consolas;panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv9936335808 {font-family:AdvTT5235d5a9;panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}#yiv9936335808 #yiv9936335808 p.yiv9936335808MsoNormal, #yiv9936335808 li.yiv9936335808MsoNormal, #yiv9936335808 div.yiv9936335808MsoNormal {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;}#yiv9936335808 a:link, #yiv9936335808 span.yiv9936335808MsoHyperlink {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv9936335808 a:visited, #yiv9936335808 span.yiv9936335808MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:purple;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv9936335808 p {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12.0pt;}#yiv9936335808 pre {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:10.0pt;}#yiv9936335808 p.yiv9936335808MsoAcetate, #yiv9936335808 li.yiv9936335808MsoAcetate, #yiv9936335808 div.yiv9936335808MsoAcetate {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:8.0pt;}#yiv9936335808 span.yiv9936335808HTMLPreformattedChar {font-family:Consolas;}#yiv9936335808 span.yiv9936335808BalloonTextChar {}#yiv9936335808 span.yiv9936335808hoenzb {}#yiv9936335808 span.yiv9936335808EmailStyle23 {color:#1F497D;}#yiv9936335808 .yiv9936335808MsoChpDefault {font-size:10.0pt;} _filtered #yiv9936335808 {margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}#yiv9936335808 div.yiv9936335808WordSection1 {}#yiv9936335808 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.    From: Dr. N.K.Ganguly:DBT NII [mailto:nkganguly at nii.ac.in] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 12:41 AM
To: Kirk R. Smith
Cc: stove at lists.berkeley.edu; Stoves and biofuels network
Subject: Re: Quick comment on developing international standards -- RE: [stove] Comparison of stove testing procedures  Dear Smith,  Thank you very much for making me aware of this debate. I hope this gets resolved soon.   With best regards,  Sincerely,  Prof.  N. K. Ganguly  On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:57 AM, Mitchell, John <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; and2.   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 14th 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/webinars  Additionally, 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  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 All the best, John  From: 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; Stoves and biofuels network <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 developmentbefore 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.  

PaulDoc  /  Dr TLUD  /  Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhDEmail:  psanders at ilstu.eduSkype:   paultlud    Phone: +1-309-452-7072Website:  www.drtlud.comOn 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 protocolsYuanchen Chen, Guofeng Shen, Shu Su, Wei Du, Yibo Huangfu, Guangqing Liu, Xilong Wang, Baoshan Xing, Kirk R. Smith, Shu TaoEnergy for Sustainable Development 32 (2016) 22–30 Ab s t r a c tBiomass fuels are widely combusted in rural China, producing numerous air pollutants with great adverseimpacts on human health. Some improved cookstoves and pellet fuels have been promoted. To evaluate theperformance of pellet-gasifier stoves, efficiencies and pollutant emissions were measured following Internationaland 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 suggestedby WHO indoor air quality guidelines (IAQGs). Better control of air mixing ratio and gross flow rates of primaryand secondary air supply greatly reduced emissions and increased efficiencies. Differences among testing protocolsare the key factors affecting the evaluation of stove performance. With longer burning duration and higherpower, 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 differencesbetween the two protocols indicate the need for further efforts in emission tests and methodology developmentbefore the release of a well-accepted international testing protocol  ---------------------------
Kirk R. Smith, MPH, PhD
Professor of Global Environmental HealthChair, 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
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  
_______________________________________________
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/20160325/c5e6f97c/attachment.html>