[Stoves] Biomass briquetting tangents

Sun Aug 13 22:25:00 CDT 2017

Tom:

Before you call me out as reaching a conclusion that is "flat wrong,"
please read my statement:

"*If* their stoves are not tested *or don't score well in lab tests*, *but
sell well because they are adapted to their markets, there is something
unhelpful about the "lab tests" metrics and protocols;"*

I
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nikhil Desai
(US +1) 202 568 5831
*Skype: nikhildesai888*

On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 8:37 PM, Tom Miles <tmiles at trmiles.com> wrote:

> Nikhil,
>
>
>
> Your conclusion that lab techniques are not helpful is flat wrong. The
> stoves I refer to were developed with a variety of tools including the WBT
> and other common metrics before being tested in the field and adapted to
> local acceptance. You can find projects of this kind listed in the GACC
> database.
>
>
>
> The organizations who develop and promote these stoves make use of
> consultants for special purposes. More importantly they provide the
> continuity and oversight of the enterprises to train and assist the
> entrepreneurs to ensure that they are successful. It takes years, longer
> than most grants. I know of at least one case in which the sponsoring
> organization shut down a factory when they couldn’t trust the manager.
> Any organization has successes and failures. It is as much about people as
> it is technology.
>
>
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> *From:* Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Nikhil Desai
> *Sent:* Sunday, August 13, 2017 1:13 PM
>
> *To:* Discussion of biomass cooking stoves <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.
> org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Stoves] Biomass briquetting tangents
>
>
>
> Tom:
>
> Re: your comment, "Successful producers are often supported by
> independent non-profits that have organized supply chains, and continuity
> in personnel and support. Their products sometime have not been tested, or
> they score in the middle of the field in lab tests, but they sell locally
> and are adapted to their markets. These products don’t need to be blessed
> or funded by international organizations. If they don’t sell, they fail."
>
> a) If their stoves are not tested or don't score well in lab tests, but
> sell well because they are adapted to their markets, there is something
> unhelpful about the "lab tests" metrics and protocols;
>
> b) Pressures to sell can lead to short-term inventory and working capital
> problems, and deter market intelligence and innovation. It may be helpful
> to make "good:" entrepreneurs bankable so they can avert liquidity crises
> and put surplus to RD&D. The donors - international or otherwise - are
> similarly better off diverting their overheads to pure grants to the
> entrepreneurs - competitively, if at all possible - than to consultants who
> do "Monitoring and Evaluation" for some vaporous "results" without theories
> of change ever validated in actual experience.
>
> This may explain why I have been looking for proper avenues for
> "subsidies". What to subsidize, whom to subsidize, where and how?
>
> The advantage of LPG/electricity options is not just that, as Kirk Smith's
> second epiphany shows, they have the institutional and manpower capacity to
> deliver products and services but that they have bankable delivery chains
> to push subsidies through.
>
> When governments are involved, it does not matter that the LPG and
> electric companies are bankrupt in the commercial sense. Donors keep
> salvaging electric utilities all the time, and national governments love to
> both tax and subsidize their LPG companies.
>
> What would take stoves and biomass fuels to that hallowed land of
> delivering benefits of grants to the poor and not to ,,, well, let me ask
> DfID.
>
> Nikhil
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Nikhil Desai
>
> (US +1) 202 568 5831 <(202)%20568-5831>
> *Skype: nikhildesai888*
>
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Tom Miles <tmiles at trmiles.com> wrote:
>
> When the solar energy laboratory in Mali was developing a metal jiko in
> the mid-late 1980s it became apparent that production would be limited by
> the availability of scrap steel and the logistics of sheet steel,
> especially to remote areas.
>
>
>
> We should accept a multi-tiered strategy of production at small, medium,
> and large scales.
>
>
>
> If your target is small scale there are examples of stove works that
> produce tens, hundreds, and thousands of stoves that are suited to local
> fuels, tastes, and demand. Successful producers are often supported by
> independent non-profits that have organized supply chains, and continuity
> in personnel and support. Their products sometime have not been tested, or
> they score in the middle of the field in lab tests, but they sell locally
> and are adapted to their markets. These products don’t need to be blessed
> or funded by international organizations. If they don’t sell, they fail.
> You may not get to millions with this strategy but these stoves have
> improved countless lives by improving health and providing a means for
> cooks to earn income. Many thanks to the generous and dedicated people who
> are supporting this market.
>
>
>
> Tom
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
> *Sent:* Sunday, August 13, 2017 6:20 AM
> *To:* Discussion of biomass cooking stoves <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.
> org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Stoves] Biomass briquetting tangents
>
>
>
> Dear Nikhil the persistent
>
>
>
> My analysis and actions are rooted in some fundamental concepts that
> underlie the approach to project design.
>
>
>
> It is often a desire to 'make a stove locally'. As Mark Bryden's students
> have shown, there isn't enough scrap metal in Chad to replace all the
> traditional stoves with much better ones. Even if it were all making it to
> the bazaar and not being exported ‎to China, it is not nearly enough.
> Generally the better stoves all have more material in them.
>
>
>
> So what does 'produced locally' mean? They produce their own steel sheets?
> ‎Nope. Rivets? Sort of, made from chopped off nails. Screws? No. Welding
> rods? No. Bolts? No.
>
>
>
> The point is that nearly no stove made from metal is entirely produce
> in-country. So, who decided that ‎cutting up an imported sheet is 'local'?
> Why not import the blanked parts, accurately made and mass produced? Why
> ship scrap to Chad and start cutting with a hammer and cold chisel? Makes
> no sense, as soon as one admits that the material is going to be imported
> if the 'problem' is to be addressed 'at scale'.
>
>
>
> The idea we explored with George was to try to get a finished combustion
> chamber, material and processing, to Gambia for the same cost as buying the
> raw material locally. Given the rapacious nature of the local importers,
> invariably expats from the Middle East and South Asia, this was not such a
> challenge.
>
>
>
> As to its being 'affordable' that is a question of the value proposition,
> not only the cost. As the stove lasts five years, it has additional value
> as a purchase proposition. As a fuel saver, it is also more valuable. For
> lighting speed it is probably unrivaled. Big plus. Less smoke? More
> benefit. Fuel flexible? Yup. So it is a 'good value' because the value
> proposition exceeds the cost.
>
>
>
> Accessibility is a separate issue. If the amount is too big to pay all at
> once, it needs a finance mechanism and there are lots to invoke.
>
>
>
> So I agree that the definition of 'local' is a political decision. ‎If you
> are going to send anything to a developing country, don't include any
> embedded low skilled labour. Do that on site.
>
>
>
> We had a discussion here some years ago on how to create the most stoves
> with the best performance at the least cost at the greatest speed.  ‎One
> proposal was to send Vesto combustion chambers with an additional  ring to
> hold it, and ti build a mud enclosure that created the preheating chambers
> and cooking platform.
>
>
>
> This is what happened with George except instead of mud he used locally
> available plain steel sheets which are common enough.
>
>
>
> GIZ was not involved in the project, it was a WB pilot with Concern
> International. Cecil did the stove anthropology, as usual.
>
>
>
> Local production was done with the mech tech teaching institute which had
> the necessary metal working tools. It was not artisanal. ‎It was the first
> time we tried to make Vestos outside the SA region. Sujatha at Servals in
> Chennai has made some from scratch and confirmed the high-end performance.
> It still hasn't appeared in any stove performance report from Aprovecho or
> EPA through they have each had one for years. Obviously it didn't get a
> mention by D-Lab either.
>
>
>
> NIH??
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Crispin
>
>
>
> Crispin: (to George below)
>
> What you describe of Gadgil's - and your - work is yesteryear's. And
> probably for very unorthodox situations (Darfur) or small markets (Vesto in
> the Gambia).
>
> Conditions change. Electricity, skills, manufacturing capacity,
> restriction on imports (or preference for domestic production),
> availability of tools, Mrs. Clinton's enthusiasm and ISO globalism. As do
> the demographics (urbanization), resource availability (waste biomass)
>
> My point is that "appropriate technology" of yesteryears need not be the
> same today. The key idea you and Gadgil had was that "the ‘industrial’
> production was done as close to the bulk material source where the tooling
> could be produced and maintained."
>
> This remains valid, and is a very useful parameter for defining "context",
> the term I am obsessed with (at least in reaction to service standard and
> objective). Your recommendation also remain valid for such contexts:
>
> " *   Designed outside the region
>   *   Introduced after local testing
>   *   Main components needing high precision produced outside the country
>   *   All metal construction
>   *   Performance much better than local baseline products in common use
>   *   Production process adjusted/evolved as local capacity improved
>   *   Field performance evaluations confirm acceptance and long term use
> (displacement)
>
> It would be good if the project can be picked up again and expanded to
> include all the city neighbourhoods."
>
>
>
> In other contexts, "Design outside the region" and "all metal
> construction" need not apply, and "country" is simply a political term.
>
> These are the "data shortages" in the facts-free universe of "clean
> cookstoves" - data are contextual and there is not a single database I can
> find about the local, real facts of alleged global problems -
> deforestation, climate change, women's power, or health damage.
> (Conversely, not a single "stove rollout" has been done on the basis of
> actual local data on "before and after" efficiency, emissions, women's
> power, or long-term health.)
>
> The question is, why did GIZ effort limited in time and geography? How
> much damage has been done by the madness of pushing WBT and ISO Tiers?
> (Maybe not much; GACC increasingly looks like a sideshow.)
>
> I will now read the D-Lab report in light of your observations.
>
> George:
>
> Some questions:
>
> 1. Who is leading the external charge on SE4All when it comes to cooking
> energy? Is the emphasis only on households? This is important because if
> SE4All is aligned with UN SDGs, the goal is to reduce the "% of households
> using solid fuels for cooking".
>
> In other words, SDGs are as pernicious to use of biomass for cooking as
> WHO/ISO Tier 4 Emission Reduction Targets for PM2.5 (hourly average). I do
> not understand why this List has not reacted to this blatant betrayal of
> the "better biomass stoves" agenda.
>
> 2. Is there an evaluation of the Gambia stoves work in the past? And to
> the SE4All Investment Prospectus (likely to be heavily weighed to
> electricity)?
>
> ------
>
> Thanks, both. A breath of fresh air.
>
> Nikhil
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 10:32 PM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <
> crispinpigott at outlook.com> wrote:
>
> Dear George of the J
>
> Thanks. The follow-up point I want to make is stimulated by the fact that
> your project was discussed previously and it has some aspects which
> interesting to those planning stove roll-outs in locations where the are
> manufacturing capacity or skill shortages.
>
> Quick review: at about the same time, Ashok Gadgil and I concluded that
> the way forward in places with limited manufacturing capacity was to send
> partially manufactured stoves to the site, absent only what could be made
> using the available skills and manpower. By ‘concluded’ I mean we both
> started ‘doing it’, Ashok in Darfur and you with me in the Gambia. At the
> time Ashok and I have not met or communicated – we only found each other
> later and got on like a house on fire.
>
> While it has probably been done before, we didn’t have examples. The plan
> was to make the combustion chambers for Vesto stoves and send them to you,
> with all the rest of the stove made locally from available sheet metal. The
> result was a locally fabricated Vesto Junior that has the same performance
> as a product made in Swaziland.
>
> Ashok for his part, produced ‘blanked’ parts in India and sent them to
> Darfur for assemble in a workshop that had no electricity – just hand
> tools, initially. Later they added some welding to further improve the
> product.
>
> The common elements were that the ‘industrial’ production was done as
> close to the bulk material source where the tooling could be produced and
> maintained. In the case of the Darfur stove it was blanking tools. For
> those who don’t know the term, it is punching tools that typically have a
> very small vertical movement, used to create a shape out of a flat sheet.
> It can also be done by laser or plasma cutter, but when volume is involved,
> press tools are made that punch the whole part at once at very low cost.
> There was no way that could be run and maintained in Darfur.
>
> With Banjul, the challenge was similar. There is a mechanical training
> centre with limited cutting and welding facility but no laser cutting or
> CNC punching capability. The grate on the Vesto needs three press tools to
> make, including a complicated blanking tool. So the combustion chamber with
> scores of holes and the grate were produced in Johannesburg – at the
> contractor that does the CNC work and the SeTAR Centre’s stove development
> workshop at the University of Johannesburg. That facility was equipped by
> ProBEC/GIZ in its last days.
>
> At the time the goal in the Gambia was to produce locally a high
> performance stove that could burn briquettes made for available waste
> materials, which is a fuel a Vesto is able deal with quite well. The
> initial target was to make it to last five years, and it is heartening to
> hear that indeed these stoves have endured that long. Given that there is
> no ceramic component in them, perhaps designers can learn from the
> experiment. It is an all-metal stove like the Darfur Stove.  They two
> products have little else in common as to how they work, but they do share
> these:
>
>
>   *   Designed outside the region
>   *   Introduced after local testing
>   *   Main components needing high precision produced outside the country
>   *   All metal construction
>   *   Performance much better than local baseline products in common use
>   *   Production process adjusted/evolved as local capacity improved
>   *   Field performance evaluations confirm acceptance and long term use
> (displacement)
>
> It would be good if the project can be picked up again and expanded to
> include all the city neighbourhoods.
>
> Many thanks
> Crispin
>
>
>
> Crispin.
>
> Sorry my mistake. Maybe of interest to a wider audience. Even way back I
> always thought that your stove designs never got enough mention. Feedback
> from the grassroots. After the rains hopefully our economic situation has
> improved enough so we can go back to the 23 families and do a quick survey.
>
> George
>
>
> From: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott [mailto:crispinpigott at outlook.com]
> Sent: 12 August 2017 17:57
> To: icecool; George Riegg Gambia
> Subject: RE: [Stoves] Biomass briquetting tangents
>
> Did you want this to go to the Discussion list?
>
> I’d be happy to respond there.
> Crispin
>
>
> Nikhil and Crispin,
>
> Ebola only affected us here economically. Total collapse of tourism, still
> trying to recover now. At the time restricted movements of goods as borders
> were almost closed for some months – high prices for scarce products. We
> laid in boxes of tinned sardines and other tinned stuff and went into lock
> down mode for about 3 month – only fresh daily bread. In the end I think
> they traced the virus back to some monkeys in Niger or there abouts – yes
> bush meet played a big part and the eradication of forests…
>
> Crispin. Our 23 Furno Ees are still working great for the “test” families
> – nearly 5 years on. 2 ½ years ago we had a SE4ALL validation workshop here
> and both the Furno and the Briquetting were included in the Governments
> priority initiatives and the Investment Prospectus. Now with the new people
> in Government hopefully more positive actions will happen in time. We also
> had some serious funding problems with getting messed around by some
> implementing partners in charge of purse strings – we never made it away
> from the 1 tin of sardines per day. Amazing what you can do with that!
>
> Watch this space ☺ There is still spank in this old geezer!
>
> George
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170813/a0f21689/attachment.html>