[Stoves] Oxymorons and credentials --- was Re: Off-topic no longer, re: News from Colorado: 'Rolling Coal"
Paul Anderson
psanders at ilstu.edu
Tue Sep 27 14:06:34 CDT 2016
Crispin (and Nikhil),
1. "Clean stoves" and "clean fuels" are not oxymorons any more than
"happy housewife" would be.
2. You wrote:
> Unlike most of us here, he [Nikhil] has been in the trenches in
> Washington at a high level for decades and knows how the system is
> manipulated to generate funding by popularising the latest fad.
I did not know of his credentials. This is probably a good time to
generate some credibility. Easiest might be to post a resume, but a
short description might be sufficient.
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 9/27/2016 10:47 AM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott wrote:
>
> Dear Paul
>
> I think Nikhil’s complaint is that the concepts of ‘clean fuels’ or
> ‘clean stoves’ are oxymorons. There is no such thing on either score.
>
> As you are well aware, and have demonstrated in person, if a ‘clean
> TLUD gasifier’ goes wrong, there is a huge amount of smoke coming out
> until it is re-lit. So it is only clean under certain circumstances
> and with certain fuels, perhaps even only a certain /size/ of fuel.
>
> Nikhil seems to be calling ‘BS’ on the alarmist thing when that
> alarmist thing is supported by vapourware and numerical puffery.
>
> Unlike most of us here, he has been in the trenches in Washington at a
> high level for decades and knows how the system is manipulated to
> generate funding by popularising the latest fad. I guess there is some
> merit is saying ‘that is how it works’ at least these days, but it
> does not compensate for the deliberate misrepresentation of facts in
> order to scare people into handing over the piggy bank.
>
> It seems everyone but everyone in this field is aware that only a
> combination of operator, fuel and product has an assessable ‘emission’
> or ‘fuel’ metric. So let’s not beat around that bush. The forecasts
> (of which there are very few) of future impact on the public,
> especially public health or the destruction of forests which are the
> two major topics in regulations and project documents, have not been
> very accurate. The prediction to the Ulaanbaatar government that their
> air quality would continue to get worse if they didn’t ‘ban the
> burning of raw coal completely’ was a major forecast of doom. The
> population of the city grew faster than expected, the expansion of
> burning raw coal expanded, the stoves were replaced with ‘middling’
> technical features and the air quality improved more than the scenario
> that required they ‘ban coal completely and replace everything with
> ‘clean fuels’.’
>
> The emergence of Rwanda as a charcoal-sustainable country while
> continuing not to ban charcoal as the primary cooking fuel – even in
> the absence of any substantive stove replacement programme – is
> another example of failed calamitous prediction. Everyone knows we are
> supposed to decry charcoal as a cause of blah-blah-blah. Now we have
> in Laos a wide scape roll out of the lighting cone (SNV) that reduces
> emissions dramatically, saves fuel and is cheap. No change in the
> stove at all. Nor the fuel. Next they can follow in the footsteps in
> Rwanda and produce enough fuel on private farms to feed the need.
>
> We have not talked about Chad (I think) and how they turned their
> charcoal industry into a profitable, sustainable enterprise owned by
> the communities. That is another amazing example of how changing the
> administration of fuel can create wealth and jobs and sustainable
> biofuel. It didn’t require the change of stove or fuel or people. Just
> how they worked together.
>
> There is a lot of room for self- examination here. Nikhil is on the
> right track with this modelling of health impacts. He, unlike most of
> us, understands the health modeling field very well.
>
> Caution is advised
>
> Crispin
>
> Nikhil,
>
> Your message is based on playing with words, trying to make "Clean
> Cookstoves" into a silly term because there can be fuel issues. Of
> course there are fuel issues and stove issues. That does not make the
> topic silly.
>
> If this was just silly stuff, I would not have spent 15 years of my
> life helping to bring TLUD stoves to the top of the solid biomass stoves.
>
> If you think that clean cookstoves are silly and not important, then
> you are writing to the wrong group of people.
>
> Paul
>
> Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
> Email:psanders at ilstu.edu <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>
> Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
> Website:www.drtlud.com <http://www.drtlud.com>
>
> On 9/27/2016 9:13 AM, Traveller wrote:
>
> Teddy:
>
> Thank you. That news item has great relevance to this list.
>
> There are no "clean car engines" per se; their alleged cleanness
> or "emission rates" depend on fuel quality.
>
> Which is why "Clean Cookstoves" - global alliances or blogal
> dalliances - is a silly term.
>
> There are no "clean cookstoves" per se; only in combination with
> fuels, and in the context of operating practices and local
> environment (ventilation, wind, ambient air quality, other sources
> of emissions ranging from food and smoking to open waste.)
>
> The scientist collective at the ISO 2012 IWA on cookstoves
> (Guidelines for evaluating cookstove performance
> <https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:iwa:11:ed-1:v1:en>)
>
> ""recognizes that the quality and type of fuel used by a testing
> centre may impact the emissions of a cookstove. Because of that,
> the International Workshop on Cookstoves recommends that testing
> centres document the key physical and operational characteristics
> (e.g. fuel, moisture content, pot size and shape) of the system."
>
>
> Whatever little I know suggests that temperatures and air flows
> determine the ratio and composition of PICs and that at relatively
> low temperatures and irregular air flows, fuel chemistry plays a
> critical role. But there's nothing here about chemical composition.
>
> Is it any wonder folks go mumbling about "solid fuels", "dirty
> fuels"? (More on that later.)
>
> WHO/GBD claims on the "global dataset for cooking fuel use" are
> bubbly champagne - or dope - served up to minors. (Remember the
> song "Goodnight, farewell" in Sound of Music where Liesel asks for
> her first taste of champagne?)
>
> Let me put it bluntly - WHO has manufactured a "global emergency"
> based on non-existent data and questionable intelligence. (Burning
> Opportunity
> <http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/204717/1/9789241565233_eng.pdf>,
> marketing the GBD adventure of killing by assumption as a global
> health emergency
> <http://www.ccacoalition.org/en/news/new-who-report-household-air-pollution-driving-global-health-emergency>)
>
>
> Clean Cookstoves are dirty business.
>
> I for one do not believe one needs convincing evidence to act on
> reducing pollution exposures of vulnerable populations. The
> challenge is not compiling reams and reams of dubious data and
> faulty forecasts - of YLD and YLL - but to please the cooks.
>
> Ron here thinks I have soured on science. Living in Washington, I
> am familiar with the politics of science and the science of
> politics. What is going on is corrupting intelligence. There is an
> emergency in "global health", namely, it has little to do with
> individual health.
>
> Nikhil
>
>
> ---------
>
> (India +91) 909 995 2080
>
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 8:16 AM, Cookswell Jikos
> <cookswelljikos at gmail.com <mailto:cookswelljikos at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> What a story....similar to this gem is a story in todays
> newspaper regarding air pollution from bad fuel rejected by
> the EU and dumped in the African market -
>
> ''The high-sulphur fuels also have a knock-on effect, rapidly
> destroying emission-reducing technologies in vehicles,
> according to Rob de Jong, the head of the UNEP transport
> programme. “So if you buy a vehicle that’s a couple of years
> old and import it into some of the African countries, the
> technology in there – sensors and filters – all gets spoilt,
> and these cars, which are potentially very clean, are
> destroyed in a couple of tanks, and for the next 20 years will
> be belching smoke. It’s important to understand the tragedy of
> this,” he said. This in turn increases emissions of fine
> particulate matter, which can lodge deep in the lungs, causing
> cancers and other health problems.
>
> Read more at:
> http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/business/article/2000217548/dirty-diesel-rejected-in-europe-exported-to-africa''
>
>
> I certainly hope something like this cannot happen with LPG
> cooking gas or that all those generators in Lagos and Accra
> are not pumping smoke into the kitchens with induction stoves :(
>
> Teddy
>
>
> *Cookswell Jikos*
> www.cookswell.co.ke <http://www.cookswell.co.ke>
>
> www.facebook.com/CookswellJikos
> <http://www.facebook.com/CookswellJikos>
>
> www.kenyacharcoal.blogspot.com
> <http://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.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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
>
> 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/20160927/0f0672a8/attachment.html>
More information about the Stoves
mailing list