[Stoves] Stoves Digest, Vol 84, Issue 16

Nikhil Desai pienergy2008 at gmail.com
Thu Aug 17 10:28:08 CDT 2017


Andrew:

The academic deceit of course is that what a naked eye can see on a bright
clear day with open windows is not reality, whereas lab testing of per
minute emission rates converted into concentrations by some "single box"
model is reality.

So long as certified by pals and published in academic journals.

There is a lesson here, I am not just ranting. The entire "emissions
database" of WHO is vaporware, a hodge podge of disparate studies here and
there, now and then, a few people at a time for the most part. Seems to me
that database had nothing to do with the GBD 2010 manufactured around 2014;
rather, a single two-year study of some 600-odd households with spurious
accuracy was used to create numbers for concentrations applied throughout
the developing world.

With a) concentrations as proxy for exposures, b) equitoxicity of all
PM2.5, and c) application of an Integrated Exposure Response curve,
"premature mortality" was cooked up for several diseases.

Not only are all these three assumptions invalid - outrageous, not even
baby steps toward building knowledge - so that there is no sense to be made
of "dose" part of a "dose-response curve" for specific diseases, there are
no data on deaths and disability with specific causes assigned to them by
medical professionals.

Your average user in Nigeria or Germany, India or Haiti, is likely to want
to see with his eyes what smoke comes out and where it sticks when, and not
be persuaded by certificates of ISO ratings. (Under which law is another
question altogether).

Trust your eyes, Cliff and all. Don't waste them reading
Berkeley/Washington/Geneva documents.

For any progress to be made, the old theology has to be put to test and
discarded as needed. Filling the pockets of the academe or private
foundations - least of all to market LPG  - does not serve the interests of
poor cooks.


Nikhil



On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 4:29 AM, Andrew Heggie <aj.heggie at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 17 August 2017 at 06:48, cliff jarrell <cliffjarrell at yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
> > what i know is that my friend has now four improved stoves in his school.
> > they burn just a fraction of the wood he burned before and there is
> almost
> > no smoke produced.   before his walls and ceiling in the cooking area
> were
> > black with soot.   i don't know about measurements, but i know what my
> eye
> > can see.  the difference is clear.  cliff jarrell, port harcourt, nigeria
>
>
> Cliff can you tell us more about the stoves and how they are used?
>
> Lacking instruments to measure pollution (other than carbon monoxide
> monitors in some homes) its only visual evidence like you witnessed
> that we can relate changes to. In UK pub ceilings were stained yellow
> from tobacco smoke, nowadays one does not see this similarly in
> peoples homes the decoration was stained but most people do not smoke
> in their homes now, in fact smokers now account for only 20% of the
> population.
>
> Andrew
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170817/ea92b5fa/attachment.html>


More information about the Stoves mailing list