[Stoves] Stoves Digest, Vol 72, Issue 2
Donald Fowler
donf at yourlink.ca
Sun Sep 4 11:37:48 CDT 2016
On Aug 2, 2016, at 12:00 PM, stoves-request at lists.bioenergylists.org wrote:
> Send Stoves mailing list submissions to
> stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> stoves-request at lists.bioenergylists.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> stoves-owner at lists.bioenergylists.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Stoves digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Business sickness (Crispin) (Cookswell Jikos)
> 2. Re: Travel and shared rides at Oregon events, includes Stove
> Camp and USBI and more (Paul Anderson)
> 3. Re: Travel and shared rides at Oregon events, includes Stove
> Camp and USBI and more (Bruce Stahlberg)
> 4. Re: Business sickness (Crispin) (Anand Karve)
> 5. Of legitimacy and credulity (Was: business sickness, Crispin,
> 21 July 2016) (Traveller)
> 6. PLEASE STOP: Of legitimacy and credulity (Was: business
> sickness, Crispin, 21 July 2016) (Traveller)
> 7. REVISED: Of legitimacy and credulity (Was: business sickness,
> Crispin, 21 July 2016) (Traveller)
> 8. Re: Business sickness (Teddy Kinyanjui) (Traveller)
> 9. Subsidies for woodstoves (Dr. Karve, Paul Anderson) (Traveller)
> 10. PV-battery fans (Re: A J Heggie) (Traveller)
> 11. Re: Subsidies for woodstoves (Dr. Karve, Paul Anderson)
> (nari phaltan)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 22:13:48 +0300
> From: Cookswell Jikos <cookswelljikos at gmail.com>
> To: miata98 at gmail.com, Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Business sickness (Crispin)
> Message-ID:
> <CAA-40H+PgjicPfG8dsw19LZ=E_A-44uQPvERnQiR5bA7YvW4NQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi Nikhil,
>
> In light of this interesting email chain what are your thoughts on this
> recent development (in Kenya) .
>
> ''Import duties on cookstoves and fuels
>
> The government also reduced the import duty on energy efficient cookstoves
> from 25% to 10%, thus aligning them with similar cookstoves and cookers
> that use gas, electricity, and other fuels that currently attract a 10%
> import duty. The benefit of this reduced cost is expected to be passed on
> to consumers, encouraging the purchase of more efficient stoves and
> enabling the further growth of the companies that design, produce, and
> distribute these household products that have a myriad of positive impacts
> for consumers and the environment.''
> http://cleancookstoves.org/about/news/06-22-2016-kenya-drops-trade-tax-barriers-to-aid-adoption-of-cleaner-cooking-technologies.html
>
>
> Teddy Kinyanjui.
>
>
>
>
>
> *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 Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 9:23 PM, Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Nikhil Desai again, on "performance metrics" and subsidies, in response to
>> Crispin Pemberton-Pigott.
>>
>> ------------
>> I partly agree with Crispin, ?There is always the possibility that an
>> assumption is blocking the way. In this case, that a high performance stove
>> (however defined) has to cost a lot more..?
>>
>> The primary error is in holding that fuel consumption and emission rates
>> are performance metrics. Says who? The bean-counters of petajoules, trees
>> and sequestered carbon, DALYs (all of which are cooked numbers)?
>> Unfortunately, we have created energy poverty pundits with galling
>> ignorance and misinformation. Treating stoves and lungs as mere oxidation
>> machines is mockery of the poor. Subsidizing government stove experts to
>> control biomass stove designs and subsidies hasn't done a thing for India,
>> as this article last year shows so vividly Up in Smoke
>> <http://www.caravanmagazine.in/reportage/smoke-India-perfect-cookstove> (Caravan,
>> April 2015).
>>
>> What matters is creating an aspirational product, for today?s children and
>> youth, not grandmas. ?High cost? if a barrier, can be dealt with by
>> subsidies. The metric of success, in my mind, is whether a user buys a
>> second product or a replacement product with lower or no subsidies.
>>
>> ---
>> There are three main reasons subsidies have not received much attention
>> for solid fuel stoves (compared to LPG and electricity): i) Not enough
>> confidence in the benefits (as perceived by the poor, including
>> convenience); ii) Difficult or irrational technical standards that are
>> unenforceable (I can debate this some other time); iii) Perception of
>> un-competitive behaviour and potential for corruption or stagnation; iv)
>> unclear demand potential and success metrics; and v) potentially high
>> administrative costs. The last can get a nightmare with the type of
>> Monitoring and Evaluation some donors have been forcing on stove programs;
>> poor governments don?t have the luxury of fancy, non-reproducible
>> experiments on the poor just for keeping foreign PhDs employed. (Example -
>> the infamous MIT gang of Hanna-Duflo-Greenstone.)
>>
>> This doesn't apply for all means of subsidies, but the Indian government's
>> stove programs have suffered from one or more of these factors over the
>> decades. Giving consumer the choice may get around some of these problems,
>> provided i) and ii) are solved (as they are for LPG; pico-PV is getting
>> there.) For LPG, PNG and grid electricity - heavily used for some 1/3 to
>> 1/2 of cooking energy demand in India, and other sources of emissions
>> ignored by the GBD gang - problems iv) and v) are also solved, enough that
>> few people bother about iii). A successful subsidy program creates its
>> vested interests; for biomass stoves, looks like the only vested interest
>> for government subsidies are MNRE and its contractors.
>>
>> Some other stoves are probably easier to subsidize ? solar cookers (no
>> worries about fuel quality and use patterns), biogas small and large, even
>> gelfuel and stoves. My crude impression is, governments are happy to leave
>> bilateral donors and private charities the field of ?improved biomass
>> stoves?. None has yet been found worthy of a long-term subsidy program;
>> however, I feel other means of support ought to be extended to biomass
>> stove designers, testers, manufacturers. Governments are also major buyers
>> of fuel and stoves, but I rarely hear much on selling stoves to them. (One
>> exception I know of ? Albert Butare in Rwanda; I don?t know what came of
>> the initiative.)
>>
>> I suspect mid-size coal stoves are easier to certify and support ? when
>> fuel quality is fairly consistent, and utilization rates are high (cooking
>> and heating). Their users tend to be not so poor as those who rely on twig
>> collection and three-stone fires. Research on coals and their combustion is
>> extensive; coal can be burnt ?clean enough? for boiler use.
>>
>> Miracle biomass stoves that can take any fuel, so appeal to household
>> cooks to do a complete permanent switchover for any use .. Wake me up in 15
>> years. (Some years ago, I drafted a proposal that opened the door for
>> India's Advanced Biomass Stoves program that went up in smoke.)
>>
>> Crispin again, "Cecil's question is which stove will find the greatest
>> acceptance in the least time? Make and maintain it yourself forever, or
>> wait for a subsidy? That is a rational choice. If someone gives you as
>> stove and you sell it then make your own, you have benefitted from the
>> stove programme. I know where there are thousands of examples of that.
>> Maybe tens of thousands. It depends on the offer."
>>
>> If you mean tens of thousands of stoves, not worth the bother. If tens of
>> thousands of projects with millions of stoves, worth building a record. Do
>> GACC or giz or anybody have such records? I hadn't seen any as of five
>> years ago. What do you think has been spent on woodstoves programs in poor
>> countries to date by foreign governments, multilateral agencies, and
>> charities - some $400 million in 40 years? How much of that on subsidies
>> and how much on research, M&E, and learning lessons without really?
>>
>>
>>
>> Nikhil
>> ---------
>> (India +91) 909 995 2080
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2016 15:52:12 -0400
>> From: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
>> To: "'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves'"
>> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Fwd: business sickness
>> Message-ID: <COL401-EAS369ED0D936E79C2E6CF59BEB1270 at phx.gbl>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Dear Bob L
>>
>>
>> I think there is a choice or two that was not covered in your list of the
>> options (or rather, Radha?s options if that was the source).
>>
>> "a billions women can't afford the stove they need. We have three choices.
>> we can leave them out
>> we can sell them a stove they can afford that they will abandon
>> we can subsidize their purchase.
>>
>> we choose to subsidise their purchase."
>>
>> One of the things Cecil Cook keeps saying is that the designers have to
>> realise that there is an upper limit to what people are willing to spend on
>> a stove. That is true, and the amount can be ascertained, but there is more
>> complication to it.
>>
>> A stove that only does a certain range of things (addressing Nikhil?s
>> question about ?performance?) has a certain perceived value. Another device
>> that does pretty much the same thing will be assigned pretty much the same
>> perceived value.
>>
>> Three options: change the perceived value (advertising), or bring more to
>> the table (like adding electricity), or increase the performance without
>> increasing the cost.
>>
>> There is always the possibility that an assumption is blocking the way. In
>> this case, that a high performance stove (however defined) has to cost a
>> lot more. This is common cause in the donor community, with some but not a
>> heck of a lot of justification. Using the same materials and creating a new
>> configuration can deliver more benefit without increasing the amount of
>> material of the cost. Some designs would benefit from being mass produced,
>> some from mass parts production and local assembly. Some designs require a
>> high local skill level and it is difficult to transfer such skills.
>>
>> My main point is that delivering far better stoves for the same cost is
>> what engineers and in fact universities are good at doing. More function
>> for less cost. I mention universities because while they are not major
>> sources of invention, they are very good at optimising the application of
>> new ideas. Engineers are supposed to optimise the use of materials and cost
>> to deliver a given performance target with a required margin of safety as a
>> matter of course.
>>
>> Practical Action made a major effort in Darfur to improve the performance
>> of the local mud stoves that were in common use. They achieved a consistent
>> 50% fuel saving across the board without an increase in cost. Such an
>> achievement is usually accompanied by a reduction in emissions of smoke and
>> CO because they have to be burned to get that magnitude of performance
>> increase. Not always, but almost all the time. So we can demonstrate that
>> the goal of improvement can be achieved without having to spend more.
>>
>> We can also spend more and get an improvement, no problem. Cecil?s
>> question is which stove will find the greatest acceptance in the least
>> time? Make and maintain it yourself forever, or wait for a subsidy? That is
>> a rational choice. If someone gives you as stove and you sell it then make
>> your own, you have benefitted from the stove programme. I know where there
>> are thousands of examples of that. Maybe tens of thousands. It depends on
>> the offer.
>>
>> Bob, it sounds like you have a winner of an approach, and it is quite
>> likely the government won?t kick in anything. Don?t give up, but unless
>> there is some net beneficial offer it will lag behind in the decision
>> tree. Is it not possible for the communities to kick something in? I live
>> in Mennonite country and they frequently do things like that. Local
>> self-upliftment. If it is really valuable and appreciated, to what extent
>> can a community organise things for its own benefit? I have seen amazing
>> things happen.
>>
>> Kukaa vizuri
>>
>> Crispin
>>
>> bob lange 508 735 9176
>> the Maasai Stoves and Solar Project.
>> the ICSEE
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20160801/171f2a6c/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 15:01:37 -0500
> From: Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu>
> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Cc: "biochar at yahoogroups.com" <biochar at yahoogroups.com>, Hugh
> McLaughlin - MA 2016 biochar <wastemin1 at verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Travel and shared rides at Oregon events,
> includes Stove Camp and USBI and more
> Message-ID: <6f2d6c5f-1c94-6cfa-5a80-3d89b1f55b63 at ilstu.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed"
>
> Bruce and all,
>
> I know that your arrival in Portland is too late to match up with Hugh
> McLaughlin for sharing ride with him. Maybe others will contact you.
>
> I have been to Crater Lake and it is FANTASTIC. Even if not
> pre-arranged, some people at the Char gatthering might want to join you
> on that 1 day adventure.
>
> Your message said you are returning to Portland on the 18th (which is
> actually your arrival date). You probably meant Aug 25 or 26. There
> will be numerous people at the USBI meeting who might be seeking a ride
> on either date.
>
> Thanks for sharing your travel plans and for your willingness to assist
> others.
>
> 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 8/1/2016 9:14 AM, Bruce Stahlberg wrote:
>> Greetings Paul and others,
>>
>> I have narrowed down my travel plans so decided to share in case it
>> works out to drive with someone or provide a ride. I may rent a car
>> (leaning that way) and if so could provide a ride(s).
>>
>> The two events I will attend are the two days (Friday/Saturday) Char
>> Production Gathering in Cottage Grove and the BioChar conference in
>> Corvalis, OR.
>>
>> I will arrive at the Portland airport on August 18th, 3:00 PM. Making
>> my way down to Cottage Grove on the 18th.
>> After the CPG there is a small break before being in Corvalis for the
>> start of the conference. I am considering a trip to Crater Lake (2.5
>> hours from Cottage Grove, 5 hours to Corvalis from Crater Lake) if I
>> end up renting a car but this is not set in stone. If there was
>> interest it is a possibility.
>>
>> Will be returning to Portland on the 18th.
>>
>> If anyone wants to contact me for possible ride sharing call/text or
>> email.
>>
>> Thanks Paul for sending out this email.
>>
>> Bruce Stahlberg
>> 612.558.5959
>>
>>
>>
>> Bruce (message below) raises the question about ride sharing.
>> This is a way for people to assist each other, so we need good
>> communications:
>>
>> 1. TWO main categories: Initial arrival and At
>> events/between events
>>
>> 2. The easy one is "At and between events". My experience is
>> that there are usually multiple cars with drivers willing to help
>> others. You meet these people at the events and connections
>> happen easily. For the major shift (which is after the 3 events at
>> Cottage Grove) to go to Corvallis for the USBI conference, there
>> should be plenty of cars leaving sometime after 4 PM Saturday and
>> with arrival by Monday morning for USBI pre-conference events.
>> Exactly when each vehicle is moving is not known. But people with
>> cars (and possibly a spare seat or two) include:
>> Paul Anderson
>> James Schoner
>> Paul Taylor
>> Tom Miles
>> Hugh McLaughlin
>> Kelpie Wilson
>> Norm Baker
>> Probably 3 or more others. (please add your names if you could
>> help with transport)
>> Who rides with whom and when will be worked out/finalized on
>> Saturday.
>> NOTE: What people do on Sunday 21 August is wide open. I
>> suspect that people will match up according to their interests.
>>
>> 3. The "Initial Arrival" issue is more complicated because of so
>> many different dates, times, places of arrival into Oregon.
>> Eugene Oregon airport is maybe 20 minutes from Cottage Grove. If
>> you are registering for one or more of the 3 events in Cottage
>> Grove, contact the organizers of each event, with information
>> about times of arrival.
>>
>> Arrival at Portland airport is a bit further away. But ride
>> sharing should be possible.
>>
>> BEST if those who NEED transportation assistance tell us all when
>> you are arriving where.
>>
>> 4. JUST IN CASE it might help some, note that some of us are
>> driving long distances (starting outside of Oregon) and perhaps
>> shared driving time and fuel costs might match someone's interests.
>> A. Paul Anderson is driving from central Illinois on 7 or 8
>> August with arrival in Cottage Grove on Wed. 10 August.
>> B. James Schoner is driving from central Arizona
>> C. Norm Baker is coming from Seattle, but might have a full
>> vehicle already.
>> D. Several others (unknown)
>>
>> 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 <tel:%2B1-309-452-7072>
>> Website:www.drtlud.com <http://www.drtlud.com>
>>
>> On 7/19/2016 12:22 PM, Affordable Energy wrote:
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> It would be helpful for possible ride sharing between events if
>>> there could be coordination between attendees. I could either be
>>> looking for a ride or possibly rent and therefore be able to
>>> offer a ride.
>>>
>>> Any ideas on how to put attendees in touch with one another? My
>>> email can be shared with my permission.
>>>
>>> Thanks and see you in AUGUST.
>>>
>>> Bruce
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Jul 18, 2016, at 11:24 PM, Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu
>>> <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mike,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for that info about Stove Camp 2016. That info will be
>>>> made available also at my website where there is info and links
>>>> to ALL FOUR stove and biochar event between 11 and 25 August
>>>> (first three in Cottage Grove Oregon, and then US Biochar
>>>> Initiative conference in Corvallis, Oregon.
>>>> 1. Stove Summit
>>>> 2. Stove Camp
>>>> 3. Char Production Gathering (CPG)
>>>> 4. USBI
>>>>
>>>> I will be at all 4 events and look forward to seeing many of you
>>>> there.
>>>>
>>>> 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 <tel:%2B1-309-452-7072>
>>>> Website:www.drtlud.com <http://www.drtlud.com>
>>>> On 7/18/2016 3:29 PM, Mike Hatfield wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> *Stove Camp August 15 - 19, 2016*
>>>>>
>>>>> *Aprovecho Research Center*
>>>>>
>>>>> *Cottage Grove, Oregon*
>>>>>
>>>>> ?As always, Stove Camp will give folks a chance to test stoves
>>>>> with the two emissions hoods.
>>>>>
>>>>> ?Two classes per day include how to make 5 new ?Tier 4? stoves
>>>>> developed with DOE funding.
>>>>>
>>>>> ?Learn from Kirk Harris and Dr. TLUD how to make a new
>>>>> generation of super clean TLUDs with turn down!
>>>>>
>>>>> ?See PM 2.5 lowered 75% with inexpensive filters!
>>>>>
>>>>> A $250 prize is awarded to the team that makes the most
>>>>> progress, proven by testing here in the lab, on the creation of
>>>>> a $10 ?Tier 4? stove.
>>>>>
>>>>> Food will be purchased and prepared by the campers (to keep
>>>>> costs as low as possible) on TLUDs, forced draft stoves,
>>>>> retained heat cookers, beautiful new ovens, Rocket stoves,
>>>>> charcoal stove, etc. There will be lots of music, great
>>>>> conversation, contemplative walks in the new Lazy Path Garden,
>>>>> watching the moon and stars, and swimming in the river 300
>>>>> yards from the lab.
>>>>>
>>>>> The cost is $400 for the week. Camp on site (free) or stay in
>>>>> town in a motel.
>>>>>
>>>>> For all details contact: mike at aprovecho.org
>>>>> <mailto:mikehatfield at aprovecho.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Stove**Camp 2016 Schedule*
>>>>>
>>>>> 76132 Blue Mountain School Road
>>>>> Cottage Grove, OR 97424
>>>>> 541 767 0287 <tel:541%20767%200287> www.aprovecho.org
>>>>> <http://www.aprovecho.org/>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Go east on Mosby Creek Road from Cottage Grove. Do not take
>>>>> the big left turn but continue straight up the hill on Blue
>>>>> Mountain School Road. We?re in the school buildings across from
>>>>> the park on the river.?
>>>>>
>>>>> *Sunday August 14*
>>>>>
>>>>> Arrive and set up camp. Meet Dean Still and the interns, have a
>>>>> cup of great coffee, watch the river, read Sam Baldwin's
>>>>> chapter on heat transfer (Biomass Stoves: Engineering Design,
>>>>> Development, and Dissemination on the web). Make dinner with
>>>>> other campers on modern wood fired stoves.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Monday August 15*
>>>>>
>>>>> Breakfast: Campers make breakfast on wood burning stoves. Don?t
>>>>> burn the oatmeal!
>>>>>
>>>>> *9-10:00am *Introductions.**Discuss/Create Agenda. Join a
>>>>> scientific team to win the prize! Create the best $10 ?Tier 4?
>>>>> stove. Voting at end of week by campers.
>>>>>
>>>>> *10:00- 11am* Dr. Larry Winiarski on Rocket Design Principles**
>>>>>
>>>>> *11am-12am*Kirk Harris and Dr. Paul Anderson explain new
>>>>> advances with TLUDs
>>>>>
>>>>> *12-2pm*Make Lunch/Discussion/Collaboration
>>>>>
>>>>> *2-4pm* Introduction to testing equip (Lab Hood, WBT, CCT and
>>>>> Test Kitchen). Test stoves under the emission hoods!
>>>>>
>>>>> *4-5pm* The new Department of Energy project ?Tier 4? stoves!
>>>>> (Dean)
>>>>>
>>>>> *5-7pm* Make Dinner, Music, and Frivolity
>>>>>
>>>>> *Tuesday August 16*
>>>>>
>>>>> Breakfast: Campers make breakfast on wood burning stoves.
>>>>>
>>>>> *7-9am*Breakfast. Campers make breakfast on wood burning stoves.
>>>>>
>>>>> *9--9:30am*Discuss number crunching from previous day?s testing
>>>>> (Sam, Dennis, Jessie)
>>>>>
>>>>> *9-30 -10:30am* Charcoal stoves, Filters, and Retained Heat
>>>>> (Dean, Sam)
>>>>>
>>>>> *10:30 ? 12am* Test stoves and teams start to make $10 ?Tier 4?
>>>>> stoves with ARC staff and Dr. TLUD
>>>>>
>>>>> *12-2pm *Make Lunch/Discussion/Collaboration
>>>>>
>>>>> *2pm to 4pm *Test stoves and make stoves with ARC staff and Dr.
>>>>> TLUD
>>>>>
>>>>> *4-5pm*Field Experiences (Mike and Sam)
>>>>> *5-7pm* ? Pizza Party - BBQ ? Music - Great conversation.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Wednesday August 17*
>>>>>
>>>>> *7-9am*Breakfast: Campers make breakfast on wood burning stoves.
>>>>>
>>>>> *9-9:30am*Discuss number crunching from previous day (Sam)
>>>>>
>>>>> *9:30-10:30am* Heat Transfer & Combustion Efficiency (Dean)
>>>>>
>>>>> *10:30am-12*Building and testing stoves with ARC staff and Dr. TLUD
>>>>>
>>>>> *12-2pm *Make Lunch/Discussion/Collaboration
>>>>>
>>>>> *2-3pm* Talk on stove politics/stove dissemination (Dean, Mike,
>>>>> Fred)
>>>>>
>>>>> *3-5pm*Continue building and testing with ARC staff, Kirk
>>>>> Harris, and Dr. TLUD
>>>>>
>>>>> *5-7pm *Make Dinner, Music, and Frivolity
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Thursday, August 18*
>>>>>
>>>>> *7-9am* Breakfast: Campers make breakfast on wood burning stoves.
>>>>>
>>>>> *9-9:30am*Discuss number crunching from previous day (Sam)
>>>>>
>>>>> *9:30-10:30am* $10 ?Tier 4? Stoves! What are we learning? (Dean)
>>>>>
>>>>> *10:30am-12*Building and testing stoves with ARC staff, Kirk
>>>>> Harris, and Dr. TLUD
>>>>>
>>>>> *12-2pm *Make Lunch/Discussion/Collaboration
>>>>>
>>>>> *2-3pm* Experiences with TLUDs (Paul)
>>>>>
>>>>> *3-5pm*Iterations of team stoves and testing with ARC staff,
>>>>> Kirk Harris, and Dr. TLUD
>>>>>
>>>>> *5-7pm *Bread Night at the Axe and Fiddle!
>>>>>
>>>>> *Friday August 19*
>>>>>
>>>>> *7-9am*Breakfast: Campers make breakfast on wood burning stoves.
>>>>>
>>>>> *9-10:30am*Discuss number crunching from previous day. How far
>>>>> did we get?
>>>>>
>>>>> *10:30am-12:00*Presentation of stoves by
>>>>> inventors/Discussion/Voting for prize!
>>>>>
>>>>> *12:00* Presentation of award
>>>>>
>>>>> We go change the world one stove at a time. Keep in touch and
>>>>> help our friends!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Mike Hatfield
>>>>> Director of International Projects
>>>>> (541) 767-0287 <tel:%28541%29%20767-0287> (Office)
>>>>> (541) 357-9857 (cell)
>>>>> Aprovecho Research Center
>>>>> www.aprovecho.org <http://www.aprovecho.org/> (stoves)
>>>>> www.aprovecho.net <http://www.aprovecho.net> (education center)
>>>>>
>>>>> Statistically, the probability of any one of us being here is
>>>>> so small that you'd think the mere fact of existing would keep
>>>>> us all in a contented dazzlement of surprise -Lewis Thomas
>>>>>
>>>>> The known is finite, the unknown infinite, intellectually we
>>>>> stand on an islet in the mist of an illimitable ocean of
>>>>> inexplicability. Our business in every generation is to
>>>>> reclaim a little more land - T. H. Huxley
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Stoves mailing list
>>>>>
>>>>> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>>>>> stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>>>> <mailto: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
>>>> <mailto: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
>>> <mailto: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
>> <mailto: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/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Bruce Stahlberg
>> Affordable Energy Solutions, Inc.
>> 3008 41st Ave South
>> Minneapolis, MN 55406
>> 612.558.5959
>> www.affordableenergysolutions.com
>> <http://www.affordableenergysolutions.com>
>>
>> The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing
>> would solve most of the world's problems.
>> -Mahatma Ghandi
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20160801/5e50f6bc/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 15:57:24 -0500
> From: Bruce Stahlberg <bruce at affordableenergysolutions.com>
> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Cc: Hugh McLaughlin - MA 2016 biochar <wastemin1 at verizon.net>,
> "biochar at yahoogroups.com" <biochar at yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Travel and shared rides at Oregon events,
> includes Stove Camp and USBI and more
> Message-ID:
> <CAKzG=51dn_nBLF32n8Zx9uKoMKxKZVR9hLKmXzMZoMv0y5LjAg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> You are correct on my error. I will be going back to Portland on the
> 25th. Thanks for catching that. Bruce
>
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu> wrote:
>
>> Bruce and all,
>>
>> I know that your arrival in Portland is too late to match up with Hugh
>> McLaughlin for sharing ride with him. Maybe others will contact you.
>>
>> I have been to Crater Lake and it is FANTASTIC. Even if not pre-arranged,
>> some people at the Char gatthering might want to join you on that 1 day
>> adventure.
>>
>> Your message said you are returning to Portland on the 18th (which is
>> actually your arrival date). You probably meant Aug 25 or 26. There will
>> be numerous people at the USBI meeting who might be seeking a ride on
>> either date.
>>
>> Thanks for sharing your travel plans and for your willingness to assist
>> others.
>>
>> 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 8/1/2016 9:14 AM, Bruce Stahlberg wrote:
>>
>> Greetings Paul and others,
>>
>> I have narrowed down my travel plans so decided to share in case it works
>> out to drive with someone or provide a ride. I may rent a car (leaning
>> that way) and if so could provide a ride(s).
>>
>> The two events I will attend are the two days (Friday/Saturday) Char
>> Production Gathering in Cottage Grove and the BioChar conference in
>> Corvalis, OR.
>>
>> I will arrive at the Portland airport on August 18th, 3:00 PM. Making my
>> way down to Cottage Grove on the 18th.
>> After the CPG there is a small break before being in Corvalis for the
>> start of the conference. I am considering a trip to Crater Lake (2.5 hours
>> from Cottage Grove, 5 hours to Corvalis from Crater Lake) if I end up
>> renting a car but this is not set in stone. If there was interest it is a
>> possibility.
>>
>> Will be returning to Portland on the 18th.
>>
>> If anyone wants to contact me for possible ride sharing call/text or email.
>>
>> Thanks Paul for sending out this email.
>>
>> Bruce Stahlberg
>> 612.558.5959
>>
>>
>>
>>> Bruce (message below) raises the question about ride sharing. This is a
>>> way for people to assist each other, so we need good communications:
>>>
>>> 1. TWO main categories: Initial arrival and At
>>> events/between events
>>>
>>> 2. The easy one is "At and between events". My experience is that
>>> there are usually multiple cars with drivers willing to help others. You
>>> meet these people at the events and connections happen easily. For the
>>> major shift (which is after the 3 events at Cottage Grove) to go to
>>> Corvallis for the USBI conference, there should be plenty of cars leaving
>>> sometime after 4 PM Saturday and with arrival by Monday morning for USBI
>>> pre-conference events. Exactly when each vehicle is moving is not known.
>>> But people with cars (and possibly a spare seat or two) include:
>>> Paul Anderson
>>> James Schoner
>>> Paul Taylor
>>> Tom Miles
>>> Hugh McLaughlin
>>> Kelpie Wilson
>>> Norm Baker
>>> Probably 3 or more others. (please add your names if you could help
>>> with transport)
>>> Who rides with whom and when will be worked out/finalized on Saturday.
>>> NOTE: What people do on Sunday 21 August is wide open. I suspect that
>>> people will match up according to their interests.
>>>
>>> 3. The "Initial Arrival" issue is more complicated because of so many
>>> different dates, times, places of arrival into Oregon. Eugene Oregon
>>> airport is maybe 20 minutes from Cottage Grove. If you are registering for
>>> one or more of the 3 events in Cottage Grove, contact the organizers of
>>> each event, with information about times of arrival.
>>>
>>> Arrival at Portland airport is a bit further away. But ride sharing
>>> should be possible.
>>>
>>> BEST if those who NEED transportation assistance tell us all when you are
>>> arriving where.
>>>
>>> 4. JUST IN CASE it might help some, note that some of us are driving
>>> long distances (starting outside of Oregon) and perhaps shared driving time
>>> and fuel costs might match someone's interests.
>>> A. Paul Anderson is driving from central Illinois on 7 or 8 August with
>>> arrival in Cottage Grove on Wed. 10 August.
>>> B. James Schoner is driving from central Arizona
>>> C. Norm Baker is coming from Seattle, but might have a full vehicle
>>> already.
>>> D. Several others (unknown)
>>>
>>>
>>> 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 7/19/2016 12:22 PM, Affordable Energy wrote:
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> It would be helpful for possible ride sharing between events if there
>>> could be coordination between attendees. I could either be looking for a
>>> ride or possibly rent and therefore be able to offer a ride.
>>>
>>> Any ideas on how to put attendees in touch with one another? My email
>>> can be shared with my permission.
>>>
>>> Thanks and see you in AUGUST.
>>>
>>> Bruce
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Jul 18, 2016, at 11:24 PM, Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> Mike,
>>>
>>> Thanks for that info about Stove Camp 2016. That info will be made
>>> available also at my website where there is info and links to ALL FOUR
>>> stove and biochar event between 11 and 25 August (first three in Cottage
>>> Grove Oregon, and then US Biochar Initiative conference in Corvallis,
>>> Oregon.
>>> 1. Stove Summit
>>> 2. Stove Camp
>>> 3. Char Production Gathering (CPG)
>>> 4. USBI
>>>
>>> I will be at all 4 events and look forward to seeing many of you there.
>>>
>>> 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 7/18/2016 3:29 PM, Mike Hatfield wrote:
>>>
>>> *Stove Camp August 15 - 19, 2016*
>>>
>>> *Aprovecho Research Center*
>>>
>>> *Cottage Grove, Oregon*
>>>
>>> ? As always, Stove Camp will give folks a chance to test stoves
>>> with the two emissions hoods.
>>>
>>> ? Two classes per day include how to make 5 new ?Tier 4? stoves
>>> developed with DOE funding.
>>>
>>> ? Learn from Kirk Harris and Dr. TLUD how to make a new
>>> generation of super clean TLUDs with turn down!
>>>
>>> ? See PM 2.5 lowered 75% with inexpensive filters!
>>>
>>> A $250 prize is awarded to the team that makes the most progress, proven
>>> by testing here in the lab, on the creation of a $10 ?Tier 4? stove.
>>>
>>> Food will be purchased and prepared by the campers (to keep costs as low
>>> as possible) on TLUDs, forced draft stoves, retained heat cookers,
>>> beautiful new ovens, Rocket stoves, charcoal stove, etc. There will be lots
>>> of music, great conversation, contemplative walks in the new Lazy Path
>>> Garden, watching the moon and stars, and swimming in the river 300 yards
>>> from the lab.
>>>
>>> The cost is $400 for the week. Camp on site (free) or stay in town in a
>>> motel.
>>>
>>> For all details contact: mike at aprovecho.org <mikehatfield at aprovecho.org>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Stove** Camp 2016 Schedule*
>>>
>>> 76132 Blue Mountain School Road
>>> Cottage Grove, OR 97424
>>> 541 767 0287 www.aprovecho.org
>>>
>>>
>>> "Go east on Mosby Creek Road from Cottage Grove. Do not take the big left
>>> turn but continue straight up the hill on Blue Mountain School Road. We?re
>>> in the school buildings across from the park on the river.?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Sunday August 14*
>>>
>>> Arrive and set up camp. Meet Dean Still and the interns, have a cup of
>>> great coffee, watch the river, read Sam Baldwin's chapter on heat transfer
>>> (Biomass Stoves: Engineering Design, Development, and Dissemination on the
>>> web). Make dinner with other campers on modern wood fired stoves.
>>>
>>> *Monday August 15*
>>>
>>> Breakfast: Campers make breakfast on wood burning stoves. Don?t burn the
>>> oatmeal!
>>>
>>> *9-10:00am *Introductions. Discuss/Create Agenda. Join a scientific team
>>> to win the prize! Create the best $10 ?Tier 4? stove. Voting at end of week
>>> by campers.
>>>
>>> *10:00- 11am* Dr. Larry Winiarski on Rocket Design Principles
>>>
>>> *11am-12am* Kirk Harris and Dr. Paul Anderson explain new advances with
>>> TLUDs
>>>
>>> *12-2pm* Make Lunch/Discussion/Collaboration
>>>
>>> *2-4pm* Introduction to testing equip (Lab Hood, WBT, CCT and Test
>>> Kitchen). Test stoves under the emission hoods!
>>>
>>> *4-5pm* The new Department of Energy project ?Tier 4? stoves! (Dean)
>>>
>>> *5-7pm* Make Dinner, Music, and Frivolity
>>>
>>> *Tuesday August 16*
>>>
>>> Breakfast: Campers make breakfast on wood burning stoves.
>>>
>>> *7-9am* Breakfast. Campers make breakfast on wood burning stoves.
>>>
>>> *9--9:30am* Discuss number crunching from previous day?s testing (Sam,
>>> Dennis, Jessie)
>>>
>>> *9-30 -10:30am* Charcoal stoves, Filters, and Retained Heat (Dean, Sam)
>>>
>>> *10:30 ? 12am* Test stoves and teams start to make $10 ?Tier 4? stoves
>>> with ARC staff and Dr. TLUD
>>>
>>> *12-2pm *Make Lunch/Discussion/Collaboration
>>>
>>> *2pm to 4pm *Test stoves and make stoves with ARC staff and Dr. TLUD
>>>
>>> *4-5pm* Field Experiences (Mike and Sam)
>>> *5-7pm* ? Pizza Party - BBQ ? Music - Great conversation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Wednesday August 17*
>>>
>>> *7-9am* Breakfast: Campers make breakfast on wood burning stoves.
>>>
>>> *9-9:30am* Discuss number crunching from previous day (Sam)
>>>
>>> *9:30-10:30am* Heat Transfer & Combustion Efficiency (Dean)
>>>
>>> *10:30am-12* Building and testing stoves with ARC staff and Dr. TLUD
>>>
>>> *12-2pm *Make Lunch/Discussion/Collaboration
>>>
>>> *2-3pm* Talk on stove politics/stove dissemination (Dean, Mike, Fred)
>>>
>>> *3-5pm* Continue building and testing with ARC staff, Kirk Harris, and
>>> Dr. TLUD
>>>
>>> *5-7pm *Make Dinner, Music, and Frivolity
>>>
>>>
>>> *Thursday, August 18*
>>>
>>> *7-9am* Breakfast: Campers make breakfast on wood burning stoves.
>>>
>>> *9-9:30am* Discuss number crunching from previous day (Sam)
>>>
>>> *9:30-10:30am* $10 ?Tier 4? Stoves! What are we learning? (Dean)
>>>
>>> *10:30am-12* Building and testing stoves with ARC staff, Kirk Harris,
>>> and Dr. TLUD
>>>
>>> *12-2pm *Make Lunch/Discussion/Collaboration
>>>
>>> *2-3pm* Experiences with TLUDs (Paul)
>>>
>>> *3-5pm* Iterations of team stoves and testing with ARC staff, Kirk
>>> Harris, and Dr. TLUD
>>>
>>> *5-7pm *Bread Night at the Axe and Fiddle!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Friday August 19*
>>>
>>> *7-9am* Breakfast: Campers make breakfast on wood burning stoves.
>>>
>>> *9-10:30am* Discuss number crunching from previous day. How far did we
>>> get?
>>>
>>> *10:30am-12:00* Presentation of stoves by inventors/Discussion/Voting
>>> for prize!
>>>
>>> *12:00* Presentation of award
>>>
>>> We go change the world one stove at a time. Keep in touch and help our
>>> friends!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mike Hatfield
>>> Director of International Projects
>>> (541) 767-0287 <%28541%29%20767-0287> (Office)
>>> (541) 357-9857 (cell)
>>> Aprovecho Research Center
>>> www.aprovecho.org (stoves)
>>> www.aprovecho.net (education center)
>>>
>>> Statistically, the probability of any one of us being here is so small
>>> that you'd think the mere fact of existing would keep us all in a contented
>>> dazzlement of surprise -Lewis Thomas
>>>
>>> The known is finite, the unknown infinite, intellectually we stand on an
>>> islet in the mist of an illimitable ocean of inexplicability. Our business
>>> in every generation is to reclaim a little more land - T. H. Huxley
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Stoves mailing list
>>>
>>> to Send a Message to the list, use the email addressstoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>>
>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web pagehttp://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 addressstoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>>
>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web pagehttp://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/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Bruce Stahlberg
>> Affordable Energy Solutions, Inc.
>> 3008 41st Ave South
>> Minneapolis, MN 55406
>> 612.558.5959
>> www.affordableenergysolutions.com
>>
>> The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would
>> solve most of the world's problems.
>> -Mahatma Ghandi
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Stoves mailing list
>>
>> to Send a Message to the list, use the email addressstoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web pagehttp://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/
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Bruce Stahlberg
> Affordable Energy Solutions, Inc.
> 3008 41st Ave South
> Minneapolis, MN 55406
> 612.558.5959
> www.affordableenergysolutions.com
>
> The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would
> solve most of the world's problems.
> -Mahatma Ghandi
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160801/07660186/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 12:57:29 +0530
> From: Anand Karve <adkarve at gmail.com>
> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Business sickness (Crispin)
> Message-ID:
> <CACPy7Sf9Fqe_H=CM5p46EhO=-pTDZgkgZ-dV46+gZiUuPHk-QQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Dear Paul,
> One can tap several ministries for funds. Off hand, I can think of the
> following ones: The ministry of New and Renewable sources of Energy, The
> Ministry of Rural Development, The Ministry of Science and Technology, The
> Ministry of Woman and Child Welfare. When it comes to using biomass as a
> source of energy, the Government agencies show very little interest,
> because the biomass, especially agricultural waste and cattle dung, belongs
> to farmers. If some mad scientist developed the technology of using
> privately owned biomass as a decentralised source of energy for private
> use, the government would lose its stranglehold on the economy which it
> exercises through energy sources like mineral oil, mineral coal, natural
> gas, hydro-electricity, nuclear energy, wind energy etc., which are the
> monopoly of the Government. India generates annually 800 million tons of
> agricultural waste, which has almost 3 times as much energy of the
> petroleum used annually in India.
> Yours
> A.D.Karve
>
> ***
> Dr. A.D. Karve
>
> Chairman, Samuchit Enviro Tech Pvt Ltd (www.samuchit.com)
>
> Trustee & Founder President, Appropriate Rural Technology Institute (ARTI)
>
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu> wrote:
>
>> A.D.,
>>
>> Exactly so!!!! What could be some plans of action to accomplish this??
>> Who are the advocates of such assistance?
>>
>> 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 8/1/2016 2:28 AM, Anand Karve wrote:
>>
>> Indian villagers generally use fuel generated in their own farms
>> (e.g.stalks of cotton and pigeonpea, dung cakes). Government of India
>> subsidizes modern energy sources such as LPG and electricity, which are
>> used in the cities. As the fuel used by villagers is not subsidized, the
>> government should at least subsidize improved stoves. At least in India,
>> the administrative infrastructure exists for supervising such a programme.
>> Yours
>> A.D.Karve
>>
>> ***
>> Dr. A.D. Karve
>>
>> Chairman, Samuchit Enviro Tech Pvt Ltd (www.samuchit.com)
>>
>> Trustee & Founder President, Appropriate Rural Technology Institute (ARTI)
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 11:53 PM, Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Nikhil Desai again, on "performance metrics" and subsidies, in response
>>> to Crispin Pemberton-Pigott.
>>>
>>> ------------
>>> I partly agree with Crispin, ?There is always the possibility that an
>>> assumption is blocking the way. In this case, that a high performance stove
>>> (however defined) has to cost a lot more..?
>>>
>>> The primary error is in holding that fuel consumption and emission rates
>>> are performance metrics. Says who? The bean-counters of petajoules, trees
>>> and sequestered carbon, DALYs (all of which are cooked numbers)?
>>> Unfortunately, we have created energy poverty pundits with galling
>>> ignorance and misinformation. Treating stoves and lungs as mere
>>> oxidation machines is mockery of the poor. Subsidizing government stove
>>> experts to control biomass stove designs and subsidies hasn't done a thing
>>> for India, as this article last year shows so vividly Up in Smoke
>>> <http://www.caravanmagazine.in/reportage/smoke-India-perfect-cookstove> (Caravan,
>>> April 2015).
>>>
>>> What matters is creating an aspirational product, for today?s children
>>> and youth, not grandmas. ?High cost? if a barrier, can be dealt with by
>>> subsidies. The metric of success, in my mind, is whether a user buys a
>>> second product or a replacement product with lower or no subsidies.
>>>
>>> ---
>>> There are three main reasons subsidies have not received much attention
>>> for solid fuel stoves (compared to LPG and electricity): i) Not enough
>>> confidence in the benefits (as perceived by the poor, including
>>> convenience); ii) Difficult or irrational technical standards that are
>>> unenforceable (I can debate this some other time); iii) Perception of
>>> un-competitive behaviour and potential for corruption or stagnation; iv)
>>> unclear demand potential and success metrics; and v) potentially high
>>> administrative costs. The last can get a nightmare with the type of
>>> Monitoring and Evaluation some donors have been forcing on stove programs;
>>> poor governments don?t have the luxury of fancy, non-reproducible
>>> experiments on the poor just for keeping foreign PhDs employed. (Example -
>>> the infamous MIT gang of Hanna-Duflo-Greenstone.)
>>>
>>> This doesn't apply for all means of subsidies, but the Indian
>>> government's stove programs have suffered from one or more of these factors
>>> over the decades. Giving consumer the choice may get around some of these
>>> problems, provided i) and ii) are solved (as they are for LPG; pico-PV is
>>> getting there.) For LPG, PNG and grid electricity - heavily used for some
>>> 1/3 to 1/2 of cooking energy demand in India, and other sources of
>>> emissions ignored by the GBD gang - problems iv) and v) are also solved,
>>> enough that few people bother about iii). A successful subsidy program
>>> creates its vested interests; for biomass stoves, looks like the only
>>> vested interest for government subsidies are MNRE and its contractors.
>>>
>>> Some other stoves are probably easier to subsidize ? solar cookers (no
>>> worries about fuel quality and use patterns), biogas small and large, even
>>> gelfuel and stoves. My crude impression is, governments are happy to leave
>>> bilateral donors and private charities the field of ?improved biomass
>>> stoves?. None has yet been found worthy of a long-term subsidy program;
>>> however, I feel other means of support ought to be extended to biomass
>>> stove designers, testers, manufacturers. Governments are also major buyers
>>> of fuel and stoves, but I rarely hear much on selling stoves to them. (One
>>> exception I know of ? Albert Butare in Rwanda; I don?t know what came of
>>> the initiative.)
>>>
>>> I suspect mid-size coal stoves are easier to certify and support ? when
>>> fuel quality is fairly consistent, and utilization rates are high (cooking
>>> and heating). Their users tend to be not so poor as those who rely on twig
>>> collection and three-stone fires. Research on coals and their combustion is
>>> extensive; coal can be burnt ?clean enough? for boiler use.
>>>
>>> Miracle biomass stoves that can take any fuel, so appeal to household
>>> cooks to do a complete permanent switchover for any use .. Wake me up in 15
>>> years. (Some years ago, I drafted a proposal that opened the door for
>>> India's Advanced Biomass Stoves program that went up in smoke.)
>>>
>>> Crispin again, "Cecil's question is which stove will find the greatest
>>> acceptance in the least time? Make and maintain it yourself forever, or
>>> wait for a subsidy? That is a rational choice. If someone gives you as
>>> stove and you sell it then make your own, you have benefitted from the
>>> stove programme. I know where there are thousands of examples of that.
>>> Maybe tens of thousands. It depends on the offer."
>>>
>>> If you mean tens of thousands of stoves, not worth the bother. If tens of
>>> thousands of projects with millions of stoves, worth building a record. Do
>>> GACC or giz or anybody have such records? I hadn't seen any as of five
>>> years ago. What do you think has been spent on woodstoves programs in poor
>>> countries to date by foreign governments, multilateral agencies, and
>>> charities - some $400 million in 40 years? How much of that on subsidies
>>> and how much on research, M&E, and learning lessons without really?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Nikhil
>>> ---------
>>> (India +91) 909 995 2080
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 2
>>> Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2016 15:52:12 -0400
>>> From: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
>>> To: "'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves'"
>>> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Fwd: business sickness
>>> Message-ID: <COL401-EAS369ED0D936E79C2E6CF59BEB1270 at phx.gbl>
>>> <COL401-EAS369ED0D936E79C2E6CF59BEB1270 at phx.gbl>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>>
>>> Dear Bob L
>>>
>>>
>>> I think there is a choice or two that was not covered in your list of the
>>> options (or rather, Radha?s options if that was the source).
>>>
>>> "a billions women can't afford the stove they need. We have three choices.
>>> we can leave them out
>>> we can sell them a stove they can afford that they will abandon
>>> we can subsidize their purchase.
>>>
>>> we choose to subsidise their purchase."
>>>
>>> One of the things Cecil Cook keeps saying is that the designers have to
>>> realise that there is an upper limit to what people are willing to spend on
>>> a stove. That is true, and the amount can be ascertained, but there is more
>>> complication to it.
>>>
>>> A stove that only does a certain range of things (addressing Nikhil?s
>>> question about ?performance?) has a certain perceived value. Another device
>>> that does pretty much the same thing will be assigned pretty much the same
>>> perceived value.
>>>
>>> Three options: change the perceived value (advertising), or bring more to
>>> the table (like adding electricity), or increase the performance without
>>> increasing the cost.
>>>
>>> There is always the possibility that an assumption is blocking the way.
>>> In this case, that a high performance stove (however defined) has to cost a
>>> lot more. This is common cause in the donor community, with some but not a
>>> heck of a lot of justification. Using the same materials and creating a new
>>> configuration can deliver more benefit without increasing the amount of
>>> material of the cost. Some designs would benefit from being mass produced,
>>> some from mass parts production and local assembly. Some designs require a
>>> high local skill level and it is difficult to transfer such skills.
>>>
>>> My main point is that delivering far better stoves for the same cost is
>>> what engineers and in fact universities are good at doing. More function
>>> for less cost. I mention universities because while they are not major
>>> sources of invention, they are very good at optimising the application of
>>> new ideas. Engineers are supposed to optimise the use of materials and cost
>>> to deliver a given performance target with a required margin of safety as a
>>> matter of course.
>>>
>>> Practical Action made a major effort in Darfur to improve the performance
>>> of the local mud stoves that were in common use. They achieved a consistent
>>> 50% fuel saving across the board without an increase in cost. Such an
>>> achievement is usually accompanied by a reduction in emissions of smoke and
>>> CO because they have to be burned to get that magnitude of performance
>>> increase. Not always, but almost all the time. So we can demonstrate that
>>> the goal of improvement can be achieved without having to spend more.
>>>
>>> We can also spend more and get an improvement, no problem. Cecil?s
>>> question is which stove will find the greatest acceptance in the least
>>> time? Make and maintain it yourself forever, or wait for a subsidy? That is
>>> a rational choice. If someone gives you as stove and you sell it then make
>>> your own, you have benefitted from the stove programme. I know where there
>>> are thousands of examples of that. Maybe tens of thousands. It depends on
>>> the offer.
>>>
>>> Bob, it sounds like you have a winner of an approach, and it is quite
>>> likely the government won?t kick in anything. Don?t give up, but unless
>>> there is some net beneficial offer it will lag behind in the decision
>>> tree. Is it not possible for the communities to kick something in? I live
>>> in Mennonite country and they frequently do things like that. Local
>>> self-upliftment. If it is really valuable and appreciated, to what extent
>>> can a community organise things for its own benefit? I have seen amazing
>>> things happen.
>>>
>>> Kukaa vizuri
>>>
>>> Crispin
>>>
>>> bob lange 508 735 9176 <508%20735%209176>
>>> the Maasai Stoves and Solar Project.
>>> the ICSEE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Stoves mailing list
>>
>> to Send a Message to the list, use the email addressstoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web pagehttp://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/20160802/29849cdb/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 22:48:38 +0530
> From: Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com>
> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Cc: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
> Subject: [Stoves] Of legitimacy and credulity (Was: business sickness,
> Crispin, 21 July 2016)
> Message-ID:
> <CAK27e=nwoKOMVeaBQ8bgVuLOMsmArVFCyy7NS1HrOZnbv7s7HA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I apologize in advance if any acrimony is reignited. I am responding to
> Crispin's post.
>
> ----
>
> Crispin says, "There are so many conceptual errors in the evaluation
> methods (including the social methods) that were it any other field, the
> field itself would have been run out of town. And we wonder why it has
> taken so long to gain legitimacy?"
>
> You must be joking, Mr. Pemberton-Pigott.
>
> Whose legitimacy are you thinking of?
>
> Of the Clinton family business, in and out of the government? Why Hillary
> Clinton gave clean cookstoves to millions of women around the world
> <https://www.hillaryclinton.com/post/why-hillary-clinton-gave-clean-cookstoves-millions-women-around-world/>
> ?
>
> Or some "top UN official" pleading ?Make clean cooking part of eco drive?
> <http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/developmental-issues/Make-clean-cooking-part-of-eco-drive/articleshow/49431473.cms>?
>
>
> These thought leaders <http://cleancookingrevolution.com/thoughtleaders/>?
> These 20 men who care about clean cooking
> <http://cleancookstoves.org/about/news/03-07-2016-20-men-who-care-about-clean-cooking.html>?
> Of the United Nations
> <http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2016/0527/From-cookstoves-to-forests-UN-puts-eye-on-mending-global-environment>?
> The World Humanitarian Summit?
>
> Chef Jos? Andr?s proclaiming, "A Cooking Revolution: How Clean Energy and
> Cookstoves Are Saving Lives
> <https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/06/07/cooking-revolution-how-clean-energy-and-cookstoves-are-saving-lives>",
> even as Marc Gunther asks, "These cheap, clean stoves were supposed to save
> millions of lives. What happened
> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/these-cheap-clean-stoves-were-supposed-to-save-millions-of-lives-what-happened/2015/10/29/c0b98f38-77fa-11e5-a958-d889faf561dc_story.html>?"
>
>
> My own Chaiwalla Prime Minister and his two-bit sycophant who lies through
> his teeth claiming "For the first time, the government has resolved to
> bring LPG cylinders to these households
> <http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/social-programs-under-2-years-rule-of-narendra-modi/article8633316.ece>"?
> (Arvind
> Panagaria has in mind the promises to bring LPG cylinders to 50 million new
> households, those who otherwise used biomass; some
>
>
> At Prime Minister?s call, one crore richer households have already given up
> this subsidy
>
>
>
>
> Before whom? Those who cook are not as credulous as we are credulous enough
> to believe. No matter; The Gold Standard
> <http://www.goldstandard.org/blog-item/gold-standard-improved-cookstove-activities-guidebook>can
> sell green-painted lead to fools ready to part with their money.
>
> We could even appeal to the makers of automatic guns that they can offset
> their sins by buying a few million stoves we certify will save lives.
>
> Sorry, that's the topic for my next post, in response to your question on
> "monetizing DALYs". (Advance warning - with enough armwaving, you can pull
> any birds out of every hat.)
>
> It is, of course, a big deal when stoves become part of "new strategy for
> international development" - a "core pillar of American foreign policy"
> (compared to failed defense and failed diplomacy). Mrs. Clinton, who
> proudly did not bake any cookies if she cooked anything at all, was
> combining her husband's consulting fees - er, foundation expenses - and
> foreign policy.
>
>
>
> Legitimacy is measured in the market place - for research grants or for
> appliances and fuels. As for the latter, liquid and gaseous fuels,
> electricity, and appliances have gained enough legitimacy and new
> applications keep emerging. Why, my favourite is "outsourcing the kitchen"
>
> Shoving errors under the rug- er, in spreadsheets - is human; God may
> forgive but auditors and M&E consultants shouldn't. (I suspect a DfID
> evaluation of a Teri stoves program grant was jiggered to eliminate
> potentially unsavoury findings.) Questions cannot be shoved
>
> ---------
> (India +91) 909 995 2080
> 2. Re: Fwd: business sickness (Xavier, Crispin)
> (Crispin Pemberton-Pigott)
> 3.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 15:14:00 +0530
> From: Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com>
> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Cc: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>, Xavier
> Brandao <xvr.brandao at gmail.com>, Anand Karve <adkarve at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Fwd: business sickness (Xavier, Crispin)
> Message-ID:
> <CAK27e=ni3_stWvLkZ8sVb72qbgO4hzbfV==oD872x+WR-8h+uA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Xavier and Crispin:
>
> Are you suggesting that we have been selling false dreams - to cooks or to
> our masters? :-)
>
> I don't think the customers' or governments' behavior is paradoxical or
> irrational.
>
> 1. Yes, a "stove" is a part of the "cooking experience", the rhythm,
> intra-family power relationships, family budgeting ("home economics")
> practices, entwined in peer pressure, etc.
>
> 2. Education, perception of "status" (within family, community, and
> geographic regions), and high opportunity cost tag on the cook's time (if
> pregnant or young mother, widowed sister, so on), influence changes in (1).
> Some other intervening variables are location and structure of housing,
> availability of partially cooked foods or fully cooked meals outside homes,
> family size, location of employment and buying patterns for cooking
> materials.
>
> Anybody who has wandered through any part of the developing world can't but
> fail to notice how things have changed in so many ways for the poor and
> lower middle class people - if nothing else, the numbers have grown,
> residential and employment locations and conditions have shifted, average
> family size has shrunk (except in certain pockets) and kitchen is
> outsourced in stages.
>
> On the other hand, we have been stuck with sorry academic tales of
> "household energy" - neglecting modern fuels and electricity - with sad
> caricatures of cooking for the poor people. I don't need to name names,
> just look at the pictures marketed on one report after another. I am
> sometimes so angry, we experts have grabbed the most intimate possession of
> poor women - their private space for our pictures, their thoughts for our
> surveys and useless theories.
>
> And worse - some model of "standardized" cooking by a "standardized"
> combination of fuels, stoves, utensils and rhythm of combustion (stripping
> away even fuel quality and nutritional concerns), now to produce some
> "standardized" emissions, "standardized deaths and disease".
>
> It is so comforting to talk about how the customer is always wrong and the
> expert is always right.
>
> Paradox and irrationality are in the eyes - or eyeglasses - of the
> beholder.
>
> Let's write a proposal for a 20, 40-year multi-centimillion-dollar research
> project for biomass cooking in 100 poor countries, 100 million cooks. With
> multisectoral experts and "big data", real-time measurements of everything,
> and instant press releases and videocasts.
>
> Oh. We have been doing that anyway, haven't we? GACC should be given
> another contract.
>
> Nikhil
>
> PS to Crispin: I am not quite an idiotic Luddite. I am thrilled by your
> "puts out enough power to run a home is a very attractive option" and
> "alternatives which often include an engine." Not for the bottom 50-80% of
> rural households in SA or SSA yet, but possibly for the commercial users
> and the rich. As with climate change, the rich should take the first steps
> - a 2-5 kW system with energy storage, highly efficient appliances, and
> reliable backup that can take out 30% of the primary energy demand from the
> area.
>
> And to Xavier: A good enough stove for local environmental and economic
> conditions will find a market. "Willingness to pay" is a vague concept, and
> economists don't know a half of it. When girls start demanding that their
> future in-laws have private latrines and a good kitchen - clean, with a $15
> electric kettle and fan, and a $20 "clean enough" wood stove with a hood,
> no dung cakes, boys will fall in line sooner or later. Oh, some day our
> girls will do "complete, irreversible transition" to super stoves as GACC
> yakkers demand. In the meantime, we have to keep on testing and marketing.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------
> (India +91) 909 995 2080
>
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 01:08:53 +0530
>> From: Xavier Brandao <xvr.brandao at gmail.com>
>> To: stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
>> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Fwd: business sickness
>> Message-ID: <3c20df11-1f69-0598-564c-5ceacf1b50a5 at gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>>
>> Probably, we are more often facing a problem of willingness to pay, than a
>> problem of affordability. Without always knowing it.
>> In India, people get in huge debts for marriages. In West Africa,
>> people get in huge debts for burials.
>> Yet they will tell you: "Paying this for a wood/charcoal stove? Are
>> you mad?".
>>
>> Xavier
>>
>>
>> On 7/19/16 8:39 PM, stoves-request at lists.bioenergylists.org wrote:
>>> Don't tell people (or even assume) what they can and cannot afford. Make
>>> them an offer that is too good to refuse. They might take it.
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 15:53:17 -0400
>> From: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
>> To: "'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves'"
>> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Fwd: business sickness
>> Message-ID: <COL401-EAS1681BF19A084157DD0890D8B1370 at phx.gbl>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>
>> Dear Xavier
>>
>> That hits the nail on the head.
>>
>> People will pay what they can for something that has a positive
>> value proposition.
>>
>>> Probably, we are more often facing a problem of willingness to pay, than
>> a problem of affordability. Without always knowing it.
>>
>>> In India, people get in huge debts for marriages. In West Africa,
>> people get in huge debts for burials. Yet they will tell you: "Paying this
>> for a wood/charcoal stove? Are you mad?"
>>
>> So, I have been floating a couple of propositions as you know about
>> stoves that do more, even if they cost more. One is the provision of
>> electricity. I was touring a number of manufacturers in western North
>> Carolina over the past week and found one that is dealing with large
> output
>> Thermo-acoustic generators. These units can put out 200 amps at 24 volts
>> and need an input temperature on the order of 700 C which is ideal for
> wood
>> and coal stoves. I will definitely chase that up.
>>
>> The point is that a stove that puts out enough power to run a home is a
>> very attractive option. One that heats a pan, not so much. Anyone burning
>> fuel
>> should be very interested in saving money on the alternatives which
>> often include an engine.
>>
>> Regards
>> Crispin in warm and sunny Waterloo
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160721/83e3bc21/attachment-0001.html
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 14:48:46 -0400
> From: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
> To: "'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves'"
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Fwd: business sickness (Xavier, Crispin)
> Message-ID: <COL401-EAS101C54B0E761D7EBD5C735BB10A0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Dear Nikhil
>
>
>
>> Are you suggesting that we have been selling false dreams - to cooks or to
> our masters? :-)
>
> What a great question.
>
> Well, on the stove testing front we have been selling false dreams to the
> producers, the testers, the ?masters? as you call programmers, and to the
> users.
>
> There are so many conceptual errors in the evaluation methods (including
> the social methods) that were it any other field, the field itself would
> have been run out of town. And we wonder why it has taken so long to gain
> legitimacy?
>
> Selling stoves conceptually used to be about saving fuel which meant
> producing more fuel-efficient stoves. That went along OK until people
> started going ?engineering? without much of a clue about measurements,
> metrics and calculations. Until things developed into ?testing methods? we
> were sort of doing ok, and by that I mean in the 70?s. We sold ?fuel
> savings? when saving fuel was conceptually tied to gas guzzling cars.
>
> Now we sell ?health impacts? which are based on IER?s and DALY?s and GBD
> interpretations. Health impacts are notoriously difficult to ascertain with
> anything like the precision of fuel saved, even if both are calculated
> incorrectly. At least with fuel you get a reality check by watching the
> pile of wood disappear, or not.
>
> So, we are still selling false dreams to a similar crowd of customers, but
> in new, imaginative ways. Look at it this way: If the stove community can?t
> correct things as basic as the invalid metrics of common tests, how can it
> correctly predict the impact of health from an exchange of stoves? That
> takes real imagination. We have as a community, little credibility among
> real scientists at least in part because of the obvious misuse of
> scientific tools and persistent conceptual errors about how ratings should
> be produced and how health impacts are estimated (or not). Stripes are not
> yet earned.
>
> I am by no means giving up, aluta continua, as recent exchanges in the ISO
> groups have demonstrated. There is no point in producing a standard that
> will sit and rot. What is most encouraging is that the cook and the kitchen
> are getting a lot more credit for performance than they have been
> ?traditionally?. Testing in a realistic context, whether in a lab or out,
> is key. If you want to know what a stove does, use it and measure, where
> ?measure? includes interviews.
>
> We are going to fix this.
>
> Crispin
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160721/b73a0a7a/attachment-0001.html
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 14:32:11 -0400
> From: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
> To: "Stoves" <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Fwd: business sickness (Xavier, Crispin)
> Message-ID: <COL401-EAS513164DB94180E96FD6C694B10A0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Dear Nikhil
>
> PS to Crispin: I am not quite an idiotic Luddite. I am thrilled by your
> "puts out enough power to run a home is a very attractive option" and
> "alternatives which often include an engine." Not for the bottom 50-80% of
> rural households in SA or SSA yet, but possibly for the commercial users
> and the rich. As with climate change, the rich should take the first steps
> - a 2-5 kW system with energy storage, highly efficient appliances, and
> reliable backup that can take out 30% of the primary energy demand from the
> area.
>
> TAG?s don?t have to be expensive. See Scott Backhaus? 2012 paper on this ?
> it is technical but the idea is sound: mass-produced electricity generators
> will not remain an oddity for long.
>
> http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261912003455
>
> Leaps and bounds: the system efficiency rose from <20% to 49%. That is
> serious progress in a short time. The Dutch are leading, I think.
>
> Regards
>
> Crispin
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160721/4b04cbea/attachment-0001.html
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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://www.bioenergylists.org/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Stoves Digest, Vol 71, Issue 20
> **************************************
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160801/c49d9a36/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 22:52:08 +0530
> From: Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com>
> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Cc: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
> Subject: [Stoves] PLEASE STOP: Of legitimacy and credulity (Was:
> business sickness, Crispin, 21 July 2016)
> Message-ID:
> <CAK27e=mDGPUFbgq2dM5LPKkdiWNgbUR-ZtpBcfA1b6RmYQmX=g at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> The previous post was incomplete and was sent in error. I will send a
> revised one in a few minutes.
>
>
> ---------
> (India +91) 909 995 2080
>
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 10:48 PM, Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I apologize in advance if any acrimony is reignited. I am responding to
>> Crispin's post.
>>
>> ----
>>
>> Crispin says, "There are so many conceptual errors in the evaluation
>> methods (including the social methods) that were it any other field, the
>> field itself would have been run out of town. And we wonder why it has
>> taken so long to gain legitimacy?"
>>
>> You must be joking, Mr. Pemberton-Pigott.
>>
>> Whose legitimacy are you thinking of?
>>
>> Of the Clinton family business, in and out of the government? Why Hillary
>> Clinton gave clean cookstoves to millions of women around the world
>> <https://www.hillaryclinton.com/post/why-hillary-clinton-gave-clean-cookstoves-millions-women-around-world/>
>> ?
>>
>> Or some "top UN official" pleading ?Make clean cooking part of eco drive?
>> <http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/developmental-issues/Make-clean-cooking-part-of-eco-drive/articleshow/49431473.cms>?
>>
>>
>> These thought leaders <http://cleancookingrevolution.com/thoughtleaders/>?
>> These 20 men who care about clean cooking
>> <http://cleancookstoves.org/about/news/03-07-2016-20-men-who-care-about-clean-cooking.html>?
>> Of the United Nations
>> <http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2016/0527/From-cookstoves-to-forests-UN-puts-eye-on-mending-global-environment>?
>> The World Humanitarian Summit?
>>
>> Chef Jos? Andr?s proclaiming, "A Cooking Revolution: How Clean Energy
>> and Cookstoves Are Saving Lives
>> <https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/06/07/cooking-revolution-how-clean-energy-and-cookstoves-are-saving-lives>",
>> even as Marc Gunther asks, "These cheap, clean stoves were supposed to
>> save millions of lives. What happened
>> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/these-cheap-clean-stoves-were-supposed-to-save-millions-of-lives-what-happened/2015/10/29/c0b98f38-77fa-11e5-a958-d889faf561dc_story.html>?"
>>
>>
>> My own Chaiwalla Prime Minister and his two-bit sycophant who lies through
>> his teeth claiming "For the first time, the government has resolved to
>> bring LPG cylinders to these households
>> <http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/social-programs-under-2-years-rule-of-narendra-modi/article8633316.ece>"? (Arvind
>> Panagaria has in mind the promises to bring LPG cylinders to 50 million new
>> households, those who otherwise used biomass; some
>>
>>
>> At Prime Minister?s call, one crore richer households have already given
>> up this subsidy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Before whom? Those who cook are not as credulous as we are credulous
>> enough to believe. No matter; The Gold Standard
>> <http://www.goldstandard.org/blog-item/gold-standard-improved-cookstove-activities-guidebook>can
>> sell green-painted lead to fools ready to part with their money.
>>
>> We could even appeal to the makers of automatic guns that they can offset
>> their sins by buying a few million stoves we certify will save lives.
>>
>> Sorry, that's the topic for my next post, in response to your question on
>> "monetizing DALYs". (Advance warning - with enough armwaving, you can pull
>> any birds out of every hat.)
>>
>> It is, of course, a big deal when stoves become part of "new strategy for
>> international development" - a "core pillar of American foreign policy"
>> (compared to failed defense and failed diplomacy). Mrs. Clinton, who
>> proudly did not bake any cookies if she cooked anything at all, was
>> combining her husband's consulting fees - er, foundation expenses - and
>> foreign policy.
>>
>>
>>
>> Legitimacy is measured in the market place - for research grants or for
>> appliances and fuels. As for the latter, liquid and gaseous fuels,
>> electricity, and appliances have gained enough legitimacy and new
>> applications keep emerging. Why, my favourite is "outsourcing the kitchen"
>>
>> Shoving errors under the rug- er, in spreadsheets - is human; God may
>> forgive but auditors and M&E consultants shouldn't. (I suspect a DfID
>> evaluation of a Teri stoves program grant was jiggered to eliminate
>> potentially unsavoury findings.) Questions cannot be shoved
>>
>> ---------
>> (India +91) 909 995 2080
>> 2. Re: Fwd: business sickness (Xavier, Crispin)
>> (Crispin Pemberton-Pigott)
>> 3.
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 15:14:00 +0530
>> From: Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com>
>> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
>> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>> Cc: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>, Xavier
>> Brandao <xvr.brandao at gmail.com>, Anand Karve <adkarve at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Fwd: business sickness (Xavier, Crispin)
>> Message-ID:
>> <CAK27e=ni3_stWvLkZ8sVb72qbgO4hzbfV==
>> oD872x+WR-8h+uA at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Xavier and Crispin:
>>
>> Are you suggesting that we have been selling false dreams - to cooks or to
>> our masters? :-)
>>
>> I don't think the customers' or governments' behavior is paradoxical or
>> irrational.
>>
>> 1. Yes, a "stove" is a part of the "cooking experience", the rhythm,
>> intra-family power relationships, family budgeting ("home economics")
>> practices, entwined in peer pressure, etc.
>>
>> 2. Education, perception of "status" (within family, community, and
>> geographic regions), and high opportunity cost tag on the cook's time (if
>> pregnant or young mother, widowed sister, so on), influence changes in (1).
>> Some other intervening variables are location and structure of housing,
>> availability of partially cooked foods or fully cooked meals outside homes,
>> family size, location of employment and buying patterns for cooking
>> materials.
>>
>> Anybody who has wandered through any part of the developing world can't but
>> fail to notice how things have changed in so many ways for the poor and
>> lower middle class people - if nothing else, the numbers have grown,
>> residential and employment locations and conditions have shifted, average
>> family size has shrunk (except in certain pockets) and kitchen is
>> outsourced in stages.
>>
>> On the other hand, we have been stuck with sorry academic tales of
>> "household energy" - neglecting modern fuels and electricity - with sad
>> caricatures of cooking for the poor people. I don't need to name names,
>> just look at the pictures marketed on one report after another. I am
>> sometimes so angry, we experts have grabbed the most intimate possession of
>> poor women - their private space for our pictures, their thoughts for our
>> surveys and useless theories.
>>
>> And worse - some model of "standardized" cooking by a "standardized"
>> combination of fuels, stoves, utensils and rhythm of combustion (stripping
>> away even fuel quality and nutritional concerns), now to produce some
>> "standardized" emissions, "standardized deaths and disease".
>>
>> It is so comforting to talk about how the customer is always wrong and the
>> expert is always right.
>>
>> Paradox and irrationality are in the eyes - or eyeglasses - of the
>> beholder.
>>
>> Let's write a proposal for a 20, 40-year multi-centimillion-dollar research
>> project for biomass cooking in 100 poor countries, 100 million cooks. With
>> multisectoral experts and "big data", real-time measurements of everything,
>> and instant press releases and videocasts.
>>
>> Oh. We have been doing that anyway, haven't we? GACC should be given
>> another contract.
>>
>> Nikhil
>>
>> PS to Crispin: I am not quite an idiotic Luddite. I am thrilled by your
>> "puts out enough power to run a home is a very attractive option" and
>> "alternatives which often include an engine." Not for the bottom 50-80% of
>> rural households in SA or SSA yet, but possibly for the commercial users
>> and the rich. As with climate change, the rich should take the first steps
>> - a 2-5 kW system with energy storage, highly efficient appliances, and
>> reliable backup that can take out 30% of the primary energy demand from the
>> area.
>>
>> And to Xavier: A good enough stove for local environmental and economic
>> conditions will find a market. "Willingness to pay" is a vague concept, and
>> economists don't know a half of it. When girls start demanding that their
>> future in-laws have private latrines and a good kitchen - clean, with a $15
>> electric kettle and fan, and a $20 "clean enough" wood stove with a hood,
>> no dung cakes, boys will fall in line sooner or later. Oh, some day our
>> girls will do "complete, irreversible transition" to super stoves as GACC
>> yakkers demand. In the meantime, we have to keep on testing and marketing.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------
>> (India +91) 909 995 2080
>>
>>>
>>> Message: 2
>>> Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 01:08:53 +0530
>>> From: Xavier Brandao <xvr.brandao at gmail.com>
>>> To: stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Fwd: business sickness
>>> Message-ID: <3c20df11-1f69-0598-564c-5ceacf1b50a5 at gmail.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>>>
>>> Probably, we are more often facing a problem of willingness to pay, than
>> a
>>> problem of affordability. Without always knowing it.
>>> In India, people get in huge debts for marriages. In West Africa,
>>> people get in huge debts for burials.
>>> Yet they will tell you: "Paying this for a wood/charcoal stove? Are
>>> you mad?".
>>>
>>> Xavier
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/19/16 8:39 PM, stoves-request at lists.bioenergylists.org wrote:
>>>> Don't tell people (or even assume) what they can and cannot afford.
>> Make
>>>> them an offer that is too good to refuse. They might take it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 3
>>> Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 15:53:17 -0400
>>> From: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
>>> To: "'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves'"
>>> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Fwd: business sickness
>>> Message-ID: <COL401-EAS1681BF19A084157DD0890D8B1370 at phx.gbl>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>
>>> Dear Xavier
>>>
>>> That hits the nail on the head.
>>>
>>> People will pay what they can for something that has a positive
>>> value proposition.
>>>
>>>> Probably, we are more often facing a problem of willingness to pay, than
>>> a problem of affordability. Without always knowing it.
>>>
>>>> In India, people get in huge debts for marriages. In West Africa,
>>> people get in huge debts for burials. Yet they will tell you: "Paying
>> this
>>> for a wood/charcoal stove? Are you mad?"
>>>
>>> So, I have been floating a couple of propositions as you know about
>>> stoves that do more, even if they cost more. One is the provision of
>>> electricity. I was touring a number of manufacturers in western North
>>> Carolina over the past week and found one that is dealing with large
>> output
>>> Thermo-acoustic generators. These units can put out 200 amps at 24 volts
>>> and need an input temperature on the order of 700 C which is ideal for
>> wood
>>> and coal stoves. I will definitely chase that up.
>>>
>>> The point is that a stove that puts out enough power to run a home is a
>>> very attractive option. One that heats a pan, not so much. Anyone burning
>>> fuel
>>> should be very interested in saving money on the alternatives which
>>> often include an engine.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Crispin in warm and sunny Waterloo
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160721/83e3bc21/attachment-0001.html
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 14:48:46 -0400
>> From: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
>> To: "'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves'"
>> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Fwd: business sickness (Xavier, Crispin)
>> Message-ID: <COL401-EAS101C54B0E761D7EBD5C735BB10A0 at phx.gbl>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Dear Nikhil
>>
>>
>>
>>> Are you suggesting that we have been selling false dreams - to cooks or
>> to our masters? :-)
>>
>> What a great question.
>>
>> Well, on the stove testing front we have been selling false dreams to the
>> producers, the testers, the ?masters? as you call programmers, and to the
>> users.
>>
>> There are so many conceptual errors in the evaluation methods (including
>> the social methods) that were it any other field, the field itself would
>> have been run out of town. And we wonder why it has taken so long to gain
>> legitimacy?
>>
>> Selling stoves conceptually used to be about saving fuel which meant
>> producing more fuel-efficient stoves. That went along OK until people
>> started going ?engineering? without much of a clue about measurements,
>> metrics and calculations. Until things developed into ?testing methods? we
>> were sort of doing ok, and by that I mean in the 70?s. We sold ?fuel
>> savings? when saving fuel was conceptually tied to gas guzzling cars.
>>
>> Now we sell ?health impacts? which are based on IER?s and DALY?s and GBD
>> interpretations. Health impacts are notoriously difficult to ascertain with
>> anything like the precision of fuel saved, even if both are calculated
>> incorrectly. At least with fuel you get a reality check by watching the
>> pile of wood disappear, or not.
>>
>> So, we are still selling false dreams to a similar crowd of customers, but
>> in new, imaginative ways. Look at it this way: If the stove community can?t
>> correct things as basic as the invalid metrics of common tests, how can it
>> correctly predict the impact of health from an exchange of stoves? That
>> takes real imagination. We have as a community, little credibility among
>> real scientists at least in part because of the obvious misuse of
>> scientific tools and persistent conceptual errors about how ratings should
>> be produced and how health impacts are estimated (or not). Stripes are not
>> yet earned.
>>
>> I am by no means giving up, aluta continua, as recent exchanges in the ISO
>> groups have demonstrated. There is no point in producing a standard that
>> will sit and rot. What is most encouraging is that the cook and the kitchen
>> are getting a lot more credit for performance than they have been
>> ?traditionally?. Testing in a realistic context, whether in a lab or out,
>> is key. If you want to know what a stove does, use it and measure, where
>> ?measure? includes interviews.
>>
>> We are going to fix this.
>>
>> Crispin
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160721/b73a0a7a/attachment-0001.html
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 14:32:11 -0400
>> From: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
>> To: "Stoves" <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Fwd: business sickness (Xavier, Crispin)
>> Message-ID: <COL401-EAS513164DB94180E96FD6C694B10A0 at phx.gbl>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Dear Nikhil
>>
>> PS to Crispin: I am not quite an idiotic Luddite. I am thrilled by your
>> "puts out enough power to run a home is a very attractive option" and
>> "alternatives which often include an engine." Not for the bottom 50-80% of
>> rural households in SA or SSA yet, but possibly for the commercial users
>> and the rich. As with climate change, the rich should take the first steps
>> - a 2-5 kW system with energy storage, highly efficient appliances, and
>> reliable backup that can take out 30% of the primary energy demand from the
>> area.
>>
>> TAG?s don?t have to be expensive. See Scott Backhaus? 2012 paper on this ?
>> it is technical but the idea is sound: mass-produced electricity generators
>> will not remain an oddity for long.
>>
>> http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261912003455
>>
>> Leaps and bounds: the system efficiency rose from <20% to 49%. That is
>> serious progress in a short time. The Dutch are leading, I think.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Crispin
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160721/4b04cbea/attachment-0001.html
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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://www.bioenergylists.org/
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> End of Stoves Digest, Vol 71, Issue 20
>> **************************************
>>
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160801/d56a4659/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 13:05:31 +0530
> From: Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com>
> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Cc: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
> Subject: [Stoves] REVISED: Of legitimacy and credulity (Was: business
> sickness, Crispin, 21 July 2016)
> Message-ID:
> <CAK27e==tdX5PXcQfnXA9-yU=etun_eQbb7Dz3FEtd=xgt-xm2w at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> A complete version now. I apologize in advance if any acrimony is
> reignited. I am responding to Crispin's post.
> --------------------
> Yes, "On the stove testing front we have been selling false dreams to the
> producers, the testers, the "masters" as you call programmers, and to the
> users." However, this was probably not the case with charcoal stoves,
> gasifier stoves, wood or electric mtads, since their users have bought the
> products. Masters in glass palaces love building hologram shows.
>
> You say, "There are so many conceptual errors in the evaluation methods
> (including the social methods) that were it any other field, the field
> itself would have been run out of town. And we wonder why it has taken so
> long to gain legitimacy?"
>
> You must be joking, Mr. Pemberton-Pigott. Legitimacy? Whose legitimacy are
> you thinking of? For what - cooking up hype?
>
> Of the Clinton family business, in and out of the government? Why Hillary
> Clinton gave clean cookstoves to millions of women around the world
> <https://www.hillaryclinton.com/post/why-hillary-clinton-gave-clean-cookstoves-millions-women-around-world/>?
> Even as Marc Gunther asks, "These cheap, clean stoves were supposed to save
> millions of lives. What happened
> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/these-cheap-clean-stoves-were-supposed-to-save-millions-of-lives-what-happened/2015/10/29/c0b98f38-77fa-11e5-a958-d889faf561dc_story.html>?"
> Or someone passing off as a "top UN official" pleading ?Make clean cooking
> part of eco drive?
> <http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/developmental-issues/Make-clean-cooking-part-of-eco-drive/articleshow/49431473.cms>?
> These thought leaders <http://cleancookingrevolution.com/thoughtleaders/>?
> These 20 men who care about clean cooking
> <http://cleancookstoves.org/about/news/03-07-2016-20-men-who-care-about-clean-cooking.html>?
> Of the United Nations
> <http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2016/0527/From-cookstoves-to-forests-UN-puts-eye-on-mending-global-environment>?
> The World Humanitarian Summit
> <http://cleancookstoves.org/about/news/05-25-2016-advocating-for-energy-access-at-the-world-humanitarian-summit.html>?
> Omadyar network <https://www.omidyar.com/investees/living-goods>? Chef Jos?
> Andr?s proclaiming, "A Cooking Revolution: How Clean Energy and Cookstoves
> Are Saving Lives
> <https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/06/07/cooking-revolution-how-clean-energy-and-cookstoves-are-saving-lives>
> "?
>
> What is the purpose of this cooking revolution in Washington, New York -
> Occupy McDonalds, perhaps the biggest cook in the world?
>
> Or getting US to spend some $115 million from 2010 to 2015, barely over 6%
> of it in financing support for stove producers, the rest in roadshows and
> research, spreading gospel and promises. I see another $175 m is coming
> <http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2015/09/247240.htm> through the end of
> Hillary Clinton's first term.
>
> Whose meals are cooked? Of the lady who didn't bake cookies. Sycophancy is
> also legitimacy.
>
> It is, of course, a big deal when stoves become part of Mrs Cinton's "new
> strategy for international development
> <http://www.state.gov/secretary/20092013clinton/rm/2010/09/147500.htm>" and
> Ambassador Rice (now National Security Advisor) commits to "a global market
> for clean cookstoves <http://usun.state.gov/remarks/5348>" (a Global War on
> Smoke, for dirty stoves are weapons of mass destruction). Press attention
> <http://www.npr.org/2016/04/25/475584003/alter-egos-dissects-hillary-clintons-tenure-as-obamas-secretary-of-state>
> is
> legitimacy in the eyes of the gullible. (Confession - I wrote in support of
> clean cookstoves and will readily write for Mrs Clinton's stoves if I could
> get a cut from Bill using my stuff. I only have to translate my PM's Hindi
> speech
> <http://www.narendramodi.in/text-of-pm-s-address-at-the-launch-of-%E2%80%98pradhan-mantri-ujjwala-yojana-at-ballia-450837>
> .)
>
> Over here, my Prime Minister
> <http://scroll.in/article/808996/fact-check-from-claims-on-ration-cards-to-gas-connections-how-modi-inflated-the-numbers>
> beats
> the Clinton couple and signals to the world - "Get rich first, then
> subsidize gas." (And electricity
> <http://powermin.nic.in/content/rural-electrification> - free connections
> to 40 million households.) There are votes in subsidies for what people
> want; donor praise in subsidies for what donors want. The search for
> perfect woodstove went Up in Smoke
> <http://www.caravanmagazine.in/reportage/smoke-India-perfect-cookstove>.
> Arvind Panagariya crows, "For the first time, the government has resolved
> to bring LPG cylinders to these households
> <http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/social-programs-under-2-years-rule-of-narendra-modi/article8633316.ece>"
> - a promise to bring LPG cylinders to 50 million new households in five
> years, ignoring to the previous government's promise of 55 million in five
> years. Good politics - doling out LPG distributorships
> <http://www.catchnews.com/politics-news/govt-to-set-up-10-000-new-lpg-dealerships-noble-agenda-or-poll-gimmick-1453034165.html>
> (I
> think Chaiwalla's estranged brother used to be one).
>
> India supposedly has 190 million LPG consumers
> <http://www.catchnews.com/india-news/fired-up-will-the-plan-to-home-deliver-lpg-cylinders-put-out-the-chulha-1443805792.html>
> - up from perhaps 20-30,000 in 1960 - because wives, mothers, daughters,
> independent women want LPG; they have better things to do than save trees
> and don't care for Water Boiling Test x.y.#. Yes, there is "stacking"; who
> cares? My mother stacked stoves - charcoal, kerosene, LPG, electric - for
> nearly 50 years. For decades, we heard the song and dance of the "ladder
> theory" (Amulya Reddy and his acolytes). When the ladder steps got too
> wide, people stacked.
>
> Of course, when it gets too hot, get out of the kitchen; governments in
> India will ban cooking
> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/05/19/india-just-set-a-new-all-time-record-high-temperature-123-8-degrees/>
> .
>
> Indian LPG subsidies could mount to $20 billion a year (excluding the
> electricity and PNG customers, some 200 m households with LPG at $100/y
> subsidy). The justification is not in DALYs or fNRB; their legitimacy in
> the expert crowd has zero value except to the Masters of Grants.
>
> The World Bank
> <http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/17/how-to-solve-a-123-billion-problem.html>
> now has put a tag of imputed cost of $123 billion a year attached to solid
> fuels in direct use. It is the processes of combustion and fuel management,
> not the fuels per se that generate this cost, which may be sharply reduced
> by modernizing the entire fuel cycle. But instead we have been catering to
> environmental fetishism - save trees, save windpipes, whether they want to
> be saved or stoves are the best means to save them.
>
> Those who cook are not as credulous as we are credulous enough to believe.
> No matter; we have the The Gold Standard
> <http://www.goldstandard.org/blog-item/gold-standard-improved-cookstove-activities-guidebook>.
> We
> could even appeal to the makers of automatic guns that they can offset
> their sins by buying a few million stoves we certify will save lives. Or a
> Coalition of the Willing that has been generating so much fire smoke for
> years (in Middle East wars) can buy black carbon offsets.
>
> Sorry, that's the topic for my next post, in response to your question on
> "monetizing DALYs". (Advance warning - with enough armwaving, you can pull
> any birds out of every hat.)
>
> Nikhil
>
> PS: I agree in part, "If the stove community can't correct things as basic
> as the invalid metrics of common tests, how can it correctly predict the
> impact of health from an exchange of stoves? That takes real imagination.
> We have as a community, little credibility among real scientists at least
> in part because of the obvious misuse of scientific tools and persistent
> conceptual errors about how ratings should be produced and how health
> impacts are estimated (or not). Stripes are not yet earned."
>
> GIVE IT UP!! (Modi's slogan for LPG subsidies for the upper-income
> households.) I BEG - GIVE UP THE DELUSION. There is no "stove community"
> but a slum of labs and computers, each hut producing its own meal and
> emissions. Shoving errors under the rug - er, spreadsheets - is the name of
> the game. There is no way - at least, no intellectually defensible - way to
> "correctly predict the impact of health from an exchange of stoves." It
> hasn't been done, and by the time you treat the poor as your guinea pigs
> for getting research grants, you will have made millions sicker (than
> otherwise). I won't try to prove myself correct; just prove me wrong.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> ---------
>> (India +91) 909 995 2080
>>
> -----------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 14:48:46 -0400
>> From: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
>> To: "'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves'"
>> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Fwd: business sickness (Xavier, Crispin)
>> Message-ID: <COL401-EAS101C54B0E761D7EBD5C735BB10A0 at phx.gbl>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Dear Nikhil
>>
>>> Are you suggesting that we have been selling false dreams - to cooks or
>> to our masters? :-)
>>
>> What a great question.
>>
>> Well, on the stove testing front we have been selling false dreams to the
>> producers, the testers, the ?masters? as you call programmers, and to the
>> users.
>>
>> There are so many conceptual errors in the evaluation methods (including
>> the social methods) that were it any other field, the field itself would
>> have been run out of town. And we wonder why it has taken so long to gain
>> legitimacy?
>>
>> Selling stoves conceptually used to be about saving fuel which meant
>> producing more fuel-efficient stoves. That went along OK until people
>> started going ?engineering? without much of a clue about measurements,
>> metrics and calculations. Until things developed into ?testing methods? we
>> were sort of doing ok, and by that I mean in the 70?s. We sold ?fuel
>> savings? when saving fuel was conceptually tied to gas guzzling cars.
>>
>> Now we sell ?health impacts? which are based on IER?s and DALY?s and GBD
>> interpretations. Health impacts are notoriously difficult to ascertain with
>> anything like the precision of fuel saved, even if both are calculated
>> incorrectly. At least with fuel you get a reality check by watching the
>> pile of wood disappear, or not.
>>
>> So, we are still selling false dreams to a similar crowd of customers, but
>> in new, imaginative ways. Look at it this way: If the stove community can?t
>> correct things as basic as the invalid metrics of common tests, how can it
>> correctly predict the impact of health from an exchange of stoves? That
>> takes real imagination. We have as a community, little credibility among
>> real scientists at least in part because of the obvious misuse of
>> scientific tools and persistent conceptual errors about how ratings should
>> be produced and how health impacts are estimated (or not). Stripes are not
>> yet earned.
>>
>> I am by no means giving up, aluta continua, as recent exchanges in the ISO
>> groups have demonstrated. There is no point in producing a standard that
>> will sit and rot. What is most encouraging is that the cook and the kitchen
>> are getting a lot more credit for performance than they have been
>> ?traditionally?. Testing in a realistic context, whether in a lab or out,
>> is key. If you want to know what a stove does, use it and measure, where
>> ?measure? includes interviews.
>>
>> We are going to fix this.
>>
>> Crispin
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160721/b73a0a7a/attachment-0001.html
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 14:32:11 -0400
>> From: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
>> To: "Stoves" <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Fwd: business sickness (Xavier, Crispin)
>> Message-ID: <COL401-EAS513164DB94180E96FD6C694B10A0 at phx.gbl>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Dear Nikhil
>>
>> PS to Crispin: I am not quite an idiotic Luddite. I am thrilled by your
>> "puts out enough power to run a home is a very attractive option" and
>> "alternatives which often include an engine." Not for the bottom 50-80% of
>> rural households in SA or SSA yet, but possibly for the commercial users
>> and the rich. As with climate change, the rich should take the first steps
>> - a 2-5 kW system with energy storage, highly efficient appliances, and
>> reliable backup that can take out 30% of the primary energy demand from the
>> area.
>>
>> TAG?s don?t have to be expensive. See Scott Backhaus? 2012 paper on this ?
>> it is technical but the idea is sound: mass-produced electricity generators
>> will not remain an oddity for long.
>>
>> http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261912003455
>>
>> Leaps and bounds: the system efficiency rose from <20% to 49%. That is
>> serious progress in a short time. The Dutch are leading, I think.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Crispin
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160721/4b04cbea/attachment-0001.html
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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://www.bioenergylists.org/
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> End of Stoves Digest, Vol 71, Issue 20
>> **************************************
>>
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160802/16b2d5a7/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 13:59:39 +0530
> From: Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com>
> To: Cookswell Jikos <cookswelljikos at gmail.com>
> Cc: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Business sickness (Teddy Kinyanjui)
> Message-ID:
> <CAK27e=m4CvrRsBm2fGqTCVOBcE8B3rYn1aZ6RgujMo1Wjd2EQA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Dear Teddy:
>
> Thank you so much. I must say I am delighted. It may hurt domestic biomass
> stove producers who have to presumably pay higher prices for some inputs
> (metal goods) which are subject to higher duties still. I also suspect the
> urban LPG/charcoal price ratio has worsened; do you have any numbers?
>
> Several times many years ago I had to opine on taxation of LPG in east
> Africa (Ethiopia down to Mozambique). In 2006, it was about petroleum
> products pricing for the whole East Africa economic community (I forget the
> proper name) - Uganda, Tanzania, Ethiopia, Kenya and Rwanda; at the time
> one or two of these had yet to join. I suggested temporary import and VAT
> exemption on diesel for power generation (which happened in Uganda for the
> private self-generators and in Rwanda and Uganda for the utility and rental
> generators). I also suggested permanent import duty removal for LPG and
> appliances, first in Ethiopia in 1992 (didn't happen) and Tanzania in 2002
> (didn't happen; a German advisor had dismissed the government's idea
> because LPG produced CO2). By 2005, Uganda had exempted LPG from import
> duty; Kenya did in 2006 (p. 179, Kenya National Assembly Official Record (
> Hansard) for July 4, 2006).I think Rwanda did in 2007. But import duties on
> appliances and VAT on appliances and duties remained; glad to see them go.
> Kenya should sell DALY gains to the Global Dalliance of Cooking Cops, and
> reduction in non-renewable biomass fraction to the Gold Standard.
>
> I had come across the following stories on Kenya a month ago. WLPGA and
> IPEA are to be commended for pushing. Now they should be asked to figure
> out how to get the bulk (tanker) price of LPG in Nairobi to US$ 700/ton.
> (Can you get us that price too? I imagine it's more like $1,200+/t.)
>
> Nikhil
>
> PS to Paul Anderson and Dr Anand Karve: LPG tax exemptions and even
> subsidies are worth the support because people want and use LPG and
> appliances (including pressure cooker). Is there an "improved" wood stove
> for cooking that a million people have used half time a year over ten years?
>
> ** Don't save trees. Buy your local print newspapers and books. - Nikhil
> Desai. **
>
>
>
>
> http://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/business/Nairobi-mulls-tax-waiver-on-cooking-gas-/-/2560/3019138/-/opmkik/-/index.html
>
> Nairobi mulls tax waiver on cooking gas
>
> Posted Saturday, January 2 2016 at 14:04
>
> LPG attracts a 16 per cent VAT, a railways development levy of 1.5 per cent
> and import declaration fee of 2.25 per cent. Imported cylinders and
> appliances attract 16 per cent VAT and import duty of 25 per cent.
>
> A 6kg cylinder filled with LPG retails for about Ksh1,400 ($140) while the
> 13kg cylinder costs about Ksh2,500 ($250) in Nairobi.
>
> Alex Evans, the chairman of the New York-based operating committee of GLPGP
> said that Kenya?s forest cover is depleted due to over dependence on wood
> fuel.
>
> The Ministry of Energy said Ksh642 million ($64.2 million) has been
> budgeted for the promotion of efficiency in the conversion and utilisation
> of biomass energy and waste.
> http://www.lpgbusinessreview.com/2015/06/26/kenyas-move-towards-lpg/
>
>
>
> ---------
> (India +91) 909 995 2080
>
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Cookswell Jikos <cookswelljikos at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Nikhil,
>>
>> In light of this interesting email chain what are your thoughts on this
>> recent development (in Kenya) .
>>
>> ''Import duties on cookstoves and fuels
>>
>> The government also reduced the import duty on energy efficient cookstoves
>> from 25% to 10%, thus aligning them with similar cookstoves and cookers
>> that use gas, electricity, and other fuels that currently attract a 10%
>> import duty. The benefit of this reduced cost is expected to be passed on
>> to consumers, encouraging the purchase of more efficient stoves and
>> enabling the further growth of the companies that design, produce, and
>> distribute these household products that have a myriad of positive impacts
>> for consumers and the environment.''
>> http://cleancookstoves.org/about/news/06-22-2016-kenya-drops-trade-tax-barriers-to-aid-adoption-of-cleaner-cooking-technologies.html
>>
>>
>> Teddy Kinyanjui.
>>
>> *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.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160802/3968d5da/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:06:56 +0530
> From: Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com>
> To: Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu>
> Cc: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
> <crispinpigott at outlook.com>, Anil Rajvanshi <anilrajvanshi at gmail.com>,
> Lange <rbtvl at aol.com>
> Subject: [Stoves] Subsidies for woodstoves (Dr. Karve, Paul Anderson)
> Message-ID:
> <CAK27e==7KyjeQwiRr6muPuyFYNoB-tQYmax5Rzi3gi5+KuTdCw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I changed the subject line.
>
> Dr. Karve says, " As the fuel used by villagers is not subsidized, the
> government should at least subsidize improved stoves. At least in India,
> the administrative infrastructure exists for supervising such a programme."
>
> I do agree there ought to be some means of supporting the poor who cannot
> afford LPG and electricity just yet and may not have access to it. I don't
> think the administrative infrastructure for supervising a biomass stove
> program is adequate; I have the MNRE and state energy agencies in mind, and
> they have failed miserably in producing stoves that people want.
>
> I am always happy to be proven wrong.
>
> The issue is not as much "biomass" - a favorite "renewable energy" of
> Amulya Reddy and the rest of the Gang of Four (Goldemberg, Williams,
> Johannsen) - versus "fossil fuels" - Global Green's demon, as if every CO2
> molecule is a Weapon of Mass Destruction. Rather, the issue is the use of
> women's time, and women's preferences. (Men's tastes and budgets adjust; I
> am not willing to accept the gender crowd's whining at face value.)
>
> 1. Are there stoves worth subsidizing? If I were a finance minister - or a
> prime minister (after all, my Chaiwalla PM might have known how to make tea
> on charcoal; there are hawkers around the corner who use charcoal) - my
> question is, "What is the guarantee that people will use these stoves?" My
> thinking should be, "Who does the subsidy go to? Am I going to have to
> subsidize Cooking Cops with their monitors and survey smartphones to
> discover how many trees are saved and how many premature deaths are averted
> in two, five or twenty years? No, I want to help the poor, and my metric of
> success is that "clean enough" biomass stoves ought to be used at least
> half the time by the BPL (Below Poverty Level) families. I don't care if
> they sell the stoves to richer folks, so long as the stoves are being used,
> and give me some comfort (without sending the Cooking Cops) that pollution
> has decreased. (This covers the the first and fourth of my three - er, five
> - reasons for solid fuel stoves not getting much attention except
> technophiles and environmentalists.)
>
> 2. What are the opportunity costs of biomass? Even as a finance minister, I
> might see that husk from rice mills is going to brick kilns and is too
> expensive for making fuel pellets for households. Is there a way to
> subsidize some other biomass fuel? Does that change the land and water use
> patterns that I may have to bother about in terms of tax and subsidy plans?
>
> 3. Who ought to get the subsidy, for what, and how? The old MNRE method -
> used many parts of the world - was to allocate "per stove" grants (of
> unpredictable amount and unpredictable disbursement schedule) to different
> states in India with "qualified" stove manufacturers. (The famous Gandhi
> Ashram shop is up a couple of miles; I might go check out how they are
> doing with solar stoves that I first saw 50 years ago.) This has clear
> potential for uncompetitive behavior and zero monetary incentive for
> innovation. (My point iii earlier; might also apply to point v) except that
> good programs do take high administrative costs and technical assistance,
> no use skimping on brain power, which is the best "renewable biomass" we
> have).
>
> 4. Finally my old point ii) - "Difficult or irrational technical standards
> that are unenforceable." I am not a stove designer, but I do take the point
> in Up in Smoke that solid fuel combustion - small-scale, variable power,
> with seasonal or daily variations in fuel quality and cooking practices -
> is more difficult than rocket science. Put in highly educated and skilled
> physicists and engineers without much experience in poor people's cooking
> or living patterns - except from books and conference presentations - and
> you guarantee failure. The poor are too smart to just hand over the
> super-duper PhDs the satisfaction of being right. (Sure, those PhDs can
> amply see what they want to see and then publish paper, like the MIT con
> e-cons I mentioned before.)
>
> I have no hope for experts who spend 40+ years on test standards - and for
> what - instantaneous emission rates generalizable over all woodfuel
> qualities and cooking practices, with the supposed health impacts
> generalizable to all lungs of the past and future? USEPA is not going to
> save mama earth or her children, my sibings.
>
> Give the poor people a break! Drop the standards game except when repeat
> field use confirms that they perform as expected - expected by the designer
> and manufacturer, and more importantly, by the cook. Get a "clean enough
> product" that is used 300 days a year and use 1 tpy. (Or any other metric.
> Yes, some stove experts are very useful, even to a finance minister.)
>
> Then consider this: A one-time $50 subsidy, paid to the user in the form of
> a negotiable voucher to be cashed at any local shop that is qualified to
> handle such transactions. (I think oil companies should start selling solar
> lanterns and advanced biomass stoves; reduces their losses on kerosene and
> LPG.) Stoves qualified should be of various sizes and designs; ideally, I
> would also prefer that they have been used by the larger, richer households
> and commercial/institutional cooks, which would make them an aspirational
> product. Then let the manufacturers compete or get out of business
> (hopefully selling to another manufacturer).
>
> Even so, I suspect small-scale "clean cookstoves" with solid fuels are just
> not the answer for the working poor. Anil Rajvanshi (cc'd here) once said
> something like, "The working poor aren't rich enough to afford the luxury
> of three meals a day." I see that in the Gujarat cities and towns - and
> even some villages that I go to - every single day. It is time to get rid
> of dungcakes altogether, to produce charcoal efficiently, and to introduce
> clean kerosene stoves, plus commercial/industrial stoves and boilers,
> possibly with processed biomass.
>
> By the way, these "stoves vouchers" I suggested ought to be usable on
> gelfuel stoves and gelfuel (or biogas, or any similar biofuel and stove),
> or solar cookers.
>
> And yes, if some NGOs like Lange's have been reliably working in some areas
> where there are no "stove shops" (I have seen many in Gujarat; only once in
> Africa), the subsidy can be delivered to the NGOs, against certificate by
> the user that he has received and used the stove for a year. (Double the
> subsidy to cover pico-PV products; this "improved homes" idea is a
> phenomenal advance over the "improved woodstoves" relilgion.)
>
> Again, any offense taken is the taker's fault.
>
> Nikhil
>
>
>
>
> Nikhil Desai
> +91 909 995 2080
>
> On Aug 1, 2016, at 7:58 PM, Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu> wrote:
>
> A.D.,
>
> Exactly so!!!! What could be some plans of action to accomplish this??
> Who are the advocates of such assistance?
>
> 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 8/1/2016 2:28 AM, Anand Karve wrote:
>
> Indian villagers generally use fuel generated in their own farms
> (e.g.stalks of cotton and pigeonpea, dung cakes). Government of India
> subsidizes modern energy sources such as LPG and electricity, which are
> used in the cities. As the fuel used by villagers is not subsidized, the
> government should at least subsidize improved stoves. At least in India,
> the administrative infrastructure exists for supervising such a programme.
> Yours
> A.D.Karve
>
> ***
> Dr. A.D. Karve
>
> Chairman, Samuchit Enviro Tech Pvt Ltd (www.samuchit.com)
>
> Trustee & Founder President, Appropriate Rural Technology Institute (ARTI)
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160802/98a8ab61/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 16:16:50 +0530
> From: Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com>
> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Cc: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>,
> ajheggie at gmail.com
> Subject: [Stoves] PV-battery fans (Re: A J Heggie)
> Message-ID:
> <CAK27e=k7r34DrWWgBtZjAJPqcJPGz2JXOBZFs_+G=sqY1drD+g at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Well, do you think woodstoves with PV-battery fans may be able to capture
> 1% of the cooking energy market in a developing country 10 years? That's
> huge, and more than any improved woodstove has in the last 50 years.
>
> For one, the SE4All campaign is about "universal access" to electricity
> (and "clean cooking", whatever that means). And even then, it is becoming
> clear that there is a pico-PV battery market for phone, laptop, fan, for
> mobile applications or a host of other appliances. Adding another battery
> may improve the utilization rates for PV system investments, which then
> lower the cost of outages on the grid if there is a grid connection. (I am
> betting that at any given time, a fourth of the grid-connected households
> in developing countries have a grid failure. No use pumping diesel power in
> the grid or generate diesel power if small uses can be taken care of by
> batteries.)
>
> Any small electricity use at the bottom of the pyramid can also help build
> demand growth in independent renewable-energy grids. That is dicey; you
> don't want to add to the peak, when the marginal cost is very high. But it
> helps to have daytime load or any variable demand (seasonal). I have seen
> hydro- or bio-diesel based micro-grids with such low utilization factors, I
> have concluded that loading any "last mile" community with very low demand
> potential with high-capital cost "renewable energy" generation and network,
> meter, etc. is self-defeating. Except one builds up non-peak demands, even
> for battery charging (assuming there is a demand for that).
>
> 5 kW PV panel with small batteries - not for the 'last mile' households,
> but there may be upscale customers and hotels for rich-country poverty
> tourism. I am glad to see the 5 kW figure.
>
> Nikhil
>
>
>
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2016 15:55:02 +0100
> From: ajheggie at gmail.com
> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Free solar panels (Crispin Pemberton-Pigott)
> Message-ID: <u9oupb17ccdimc3kr21oc6igj27mbj3vu5 at 4ax.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> [Default] On Mon, 1 Aug 2016 01:22:45 +0530,Traveller
> <miata98 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Isn't this really off-topic?
>
> It's marginal but we have talked about the relative merits of using
> electricity stored in rechargeable cells to power a fan used to
> increase the combustion efficiency verses using a TEG to
> simultaneously produce electricity to power the same fan. I think the
> conclusion was that the PV plus battery had more utility and
> robustness for the cost.
>
> Producing all the ,say, 5kW necessary for cooking would involve a
> considerable cost in panels.
>
> AJH
>
>
> ---------
> (India +91) 909 995 2080
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160802/22c82d06/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 21:34:54 +0530
> From: nari phaltan <nariphaltan at gmail.com>
> To: miata98 at gmail.com, Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Cc: Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu>, Anil Rajvanshi
> <anilrajvanshi at gmail.com>, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
> <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Subsidies for woodstoves (Dr. Karve, Paul
> Anderson)
> Message-ID:
> <CAGeG2tBSU03QJdZEcMg3DcTvT5sBG6SJzkNkadrMRiAOStOyjQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> It is an interesting conversation that Nikhil has going. However I think
> that the best subsidy a Government can give is in rural restaurants.
> www.nariphaltan.org/ruralrestaurants.pdf
>
> When we enjoy eating out why should the poor of the world be deprived of
> this pleasure. They do not have a single neuron less than us.
>
> Cheers.
>
> Anil
>
> Nimbkar Agricultural Research Institute (NARI)
> Tambmal, Phaltan-Lonand Road
> P.O.Box 44
> Phaltan-415523, Maharashtra, India
> Ph:91-2166-220945/222842
> e-mail:nariphaltan at gmail.com
> nariphaltan at nariphaltan.org
>
> http://www.nariphaltan.org
>
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I changed the subject line.
>>
>> Dr. Karve says, " As the fuel used by villagers is not subsidized, the
>> government should at least subsidize improved stoves. At least in India,
>> the administrative infrastructure exists for supervising such a programme."
>>
>> I do agree there ought to be some means of supporting the poor who cannot
>> afford LPG and electricity just yet and may not have access to it. I don't
>> think the administrative infrastructure for supervising a biomass stove
>> program is adequate; I have the MNRE and state energy agencies in mind, and
>> they have failed miserably in producing stoves that people want.
>>
>> I am always happy to be proven wrong.
>>
>> The issue is not as much "biomass" - a favorite "renewable energy" of
>> Amulya Reddy and the rest of the Gang of Four (Goldemberg, Williams,
>> Johannsen) - versus "fossil fuels" - Global Green's demon, as if every CO2
>> molecule is a Weapon of Mass Destruction. Rather, the issue is the use of
>> women's time, and women's preferences. (Men's tastes and budgets adjust; I
>> am not willing to accept the gender crowd's whining at face value.)
>>
>> 1. Are there stoves worth subsidizing? If I were a finance minister - or a
>> prime minister (after all, my Chaiwalla PM might have known how to make tea
>> on charcoal; there are hawkers around the corner who use charcoal) - my
>> question is, "What is the guarantee that people will use these stoves?" My
>> thinking should be, "Who does the subsidy go to? Am I going to have to
>> subsidize Cooking Cops with their monitors and survey smartphones to
>> discover how many trees are saved and how many premature deaths are averted
>> in two, five or twenty years? No, I want to help the poor, and my metric of
>> success is that "clean enough" biomass stoves ought to be used at least
>> half the time by the BPL (Below Poverty Level) families. I don't care if
>> they sell the stoves to richer folks, so long as the stoves are being used,
>> and give me some comfort (without sending the Cooking Cops) that pollution
>> has decreased. (This covers the the first and fourth of my three - er, five
>> - reasons for solid fuel stoves not getting much attention except
>> technophiles and environmentalists.)
>>
>> 2. What are the opportunity costs of biomass? Even as a finance minister,
>> I might see that husk from rice mills is going to brick kilns and is too
>> expensive for making fuel pellets for households. Is there a way to
>> subsidize some other biomass fuel? Does that change the land and water use
>> patterns that I may have to bother about in terms of tax and subsidy plans?
>>
>> 3. Who ought to get the subsidy, for what, and how? The old MNRE method -
>> used many parts of the world - was to allocate "per stove" grants (of
>> unpredictable amount and unpredictable disbursement schedule) to different
>> states in India with "qualified" stove manufacturers. (The famous Gandhi
>> Ashram shop is up a couple of miles; I might go check out how they are
>> doing with solar stoves that I first saw 50 years ago.) This has clear
>> potential for uncompetitive behavior and zero monetary incentive for
>> innovation. (My point iii earlier; might also apply to point v) except that
>> good programs do take high administrative costs and technical assistance,
>> no use skimping on brain power, which is the best "renewable biomass" we
>> have).
>>
>> 4. Finally my old point ii) - "Difficult or irrational technical
>> standards that are unenforceable." I am not a stove designer, but I do take
>> the point in Up in Smoke that solid fuel combustion - small-scale, variable
>> power, with seasonal or daily variations in fuel quality and cooking
>> practices - is more difficult than rocket science. Put in highly educated
>> and skilled physicists and engineers without much experience in poor
>> people's cooking or living patterns - except from books and conference
>> presentations - and you guarantee failure. The poor are too smart to just
>> hand over the super-duper PhDs the satisfaction of being right. (Sure,
>> those PhDs can amply see what they want to see and then publish paper, like
>> the MIT con e-cons I mentioned before.)
>>
>> I have no hope for experts who spend 40+ years on test standards - and for
>> what - instantaneous emission rates generalizable over all woodfuel
>> qualities and cooking practices, with the supposed health impacts
>> generalizable to all lungs of the past and future? USEPA is not going to
>> save mama earth or her children, my sibings.
>>
>> Give the poor people a break! Drop the standards game except when repeat
>> field use confirms that they perform as expected - expected by the designer
>> and manufacturer, and more importantly, by the cook. Get a "clean enough
>> product" that is used 300 days a year and use 1 tpy. (Or any other metric.
>> Yes, some stove experts are very useful, even to a finance minister.)
>>
>> Then consider this: A one-time $50 subsidy, paid to the user in the form
>> of a negotiable voucher to be cashed at any local shop that is qualified to
>> handle such transactions. (I think oil companies should start selling solar
>> lanterns and advanced biomass stoves; reduces their losses on kerosene and
>> LPG.) Stoves qualified should be of various sizes and designs; ideally, I
>> would also prefer that they have been used by the larger, richer households
>> and commercial/institutional cooks, which would make them an aspirational
>> product. Then let the manufacturers compete or get out of business
>> (hopefully selling to another manufacturer).
>>
>> Even so, I suspect small-scale "clean cookstoves" with solid fuels are
>> just not the answer for the working poor. Anil Rajvanshi (cc'd here) once
>> said something like, "The working poor aren't rich enough to afford the
>> luxury of three meals a day." I see that in the Gujarat cities and towns -
>> and even some villages that I go to - every single day. It is time to get
>> rid of dungcakes altogether, to produce charcoal efficiently, and to
>> introduce clean kerosene stoves, plus commercial/industrial stoves and
>> boilers, possibly with processed biomass.
>>
>> By the way, these "stoves vouchers" I suggested ought to be usable on
>> gelfuel stoves and gelfuel (or biogas, or any similar biofuel and stove),
>> or solar cookers.
>>
>> And yes, if some NGOs like Lange's have been reliably working in some
>> areas where there are no "stove shops" (I have seen many in Gujarat; only
>> once in Africa), the subsidy can be delivered to the NGOs, against
>> certificate by the user that he has received and used the stove for a year.
>> (Double the subsidy to cover pico-PV products; this "improved homes" idea
>> is a phenomenal advance over the "improved woodstoves" relilgion.)
>>
>> Again, any offense taken is the taker's fault.
>>
>> Nikhil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Nikhil Desai
>> +91 909 995 2080
>>
>> On Aug 1, 2016, at 7:58 PM, Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu> wrote:
>>
>> A.D.,
>>
>> Exactly so!!!! What could be some plans of action to accomplish this??
>> Who are the advocates of such assistance?
>>
>> 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 8/1/2016 2:28 AM, Anand Karve wrote:
>>
>> Indian villagers generally use fuel generated in their own farms
>> (e.g.stalks of cotton and pigeonpea, dung cakes). Government of India
>> subsidizes modern energy sources such as LPG and electricity, which are
>> used in the cities. As the fuel used by villagers is not subsidized, the
>> government should at least subsidize improved stoves. At least in India,
>> the administrative infrastructure exists for supervising such a programme.
>> Yours
>> A.D.Karve
>>
>> ***
>> Dr. A.D. Karve
>>
>> Chairman, Samuchit Enviro Tech Pvt Ltd (www.samuchit.com)
>>
>> Trustee & Founder President, Appropriate Rural Technology Institute (ARTI)
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20160802/d496a8a4/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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://www.bioenergylists.org/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Stoves Digest, Vol 72, Issue 2
> *************************************
More information about the Stoves
mailing list