[Stoves] Project Drawdown

Paul Anderson psanders at ilstu.edu
Wed Aug 30 17:01:12 CDT 2017


To all, especially Anil, Ron, Nikhil, Andrew, and Jock,

Andrew, Porject Drawdown certainly has a strong cookstoves component 
(and char-producing TLUD stoves solidly links the stove and biochar 
components that are being discussed.).

Anil, please enlist your daughter into this discussion.   She has very 
valuable first-hand info about how the calculations were made.   I am 
sure that she will be interested in these discussions.   Are there other 
contributing authors who can be contacted?   Can Jock help with this, 
please?

Ron and Nikhil, we are interested in ALL the assumptions of the 100 
technologies (reduced to 80),  BUT we need to do our focused and 
strongest work about the fields that we best understand:  cookstoves and 
biochar.

WHY???   Cookstoves are in position number 21 (just behind nuclear), and 
biochar is number 72 (I think).   We need to re-assess the input data 
and see if the GigaTonne numbers (and rank numbers) should be changed.   
Hawkin clearly emphasized that the caluculations were intentionally 
favoring CONSERVATIVE results.   We are not trying to recalculate in 
favorable term.   We want to be conservative and still show that 
cookstoves and biochar have been UNDERESTIMATED by significant amounts.

Cookstoves:  Just the TLUD realistic potential should move stoves from 
position #21 to perhaps #12 or higher.   AND factor in the IN ADDITION 
TO THE GT REDUCTIONS, there are so many ADDITIONAL benefits.   ALSO, the 
cost of accomplishing the cookstove goals is far less than the costs of 
many of the other technologies!!!    We want to see a $ per GT number 
for cookstoves.  Stoves could rank in the top 5 easiest and most cost 
effective technologies for the desired Drawdown!!!!

Biochar:  Similar statements as above.
Also, Ron wrote:
> As an example, why did they assume that biochar would only be 
> associated with food (and not energy nor materials nor water quality 
> nor fertilizer and irrigation savings - much less CDR [carbon dioxide 
> removal] or simply improving land values)?  All are taking place today 
> - with favorable economics.
Okay.  Said well.   Now substantiate each one of those (and other) 
"claims".

Project Drawdown has provided us with two opportunities to reply: stoves 
and biochar.  If we do not develop this situation into an opportunity to 
press our points of view to the larger world-wide community, we will be 
missing a golden opportunity.

We want our info to be into the news.   We want to be at the panel 
discussions of Drawdown technologies.

1st, do you agree with this approach?

2nd,  if there is sufficient "yes", then we need to get started. And 
that means getting more info about how the calculations have been made.

Suggestion:  the key word is Drawdown.   Please use that word in your 
subject lines IF you are writing about this topic, and then and a few 
words to describe you subject better.   Examples:  Drawdown - stoves - 
general     or    Drawdown - Biochar - data

In some ways, this is a test of our abilities to use the Listservs for 
advancement beyond talking to ourselves.

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

-
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170830/d219b74b/attachment.html>


More information about the Stoves mailing list