[Stoves] Advocacy action: ask the GACC to stop promoting the WBT

[Xavier Brandao]

Dear Frank,

/"the WBT is only an outline for tests that need be done"/

Why do an outline when we can do (good) tests instead?

Additionally to these 3 problems you mentioned, you have to add the 
other ones I quoted previously, some mentioned in Fabio and Francesco's 
study. See below.
It's not looking too good for me. Sometimes getting something new is 
much faster and surer than fixing something broken.
I know that a lot of effort from many people went into "fixing" the WBT. 
But maybe it is beyond fixing. Maybe these are sunk costs.

  * the WBT is not contextual, as Crispin highlighted many times
  * several WBT metrics are invalid, as Crispin highlighted many times
  * there are big thermodynamic uncertainties (viz. variable steam
    production and boiling point determination)
  * there are questions about the rationale of some calculations,
    questions raised by Zhang et al.

We have been talking about the WBT for a few weeks already (not counting 
the years prior to that), and all these questions haven't been answered.

All, for more details about these questions, please find the links to 
all the studies I mentioned:

  * Fuzzy interval propagation of uncertainties in experimental analysis
    for improved and traditional three–stone fire cookstoves
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308898807_Fuzzy_interval_propagation_of_uncertainties_in_experimental_analysis_for_improved_and_traditional_three_-_Stone_fire_cookstoves

  * Key differences of performance test protocols for household biomass
    cookstoves. Twenty-Second Domestic Use of Energy, IEEE 2014:1–11.
    http://energyuse.org.za/document-archive/

To access the file, select DUE [Domestic Use of energy COnference]. 
Select DUE 2014. Select PROCEEDINGS. Select paper by Zhang etal (PDFs 
arranged alphabetically).

  * Performance testing for monitoring improved biomass stove
    interventions: experiences of the Household Energy and Health
    Project. Energy Sustainable Dev 2007;11:57–70.
    http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.461.783&rep=rep1&type=pdf

  * The shortcomings of the U.S. protocol
    http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1534&context=etd

  * Influence of testing parameters on biomass stove performance and
    development of an improved testing protocol
    https://envirofit.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/2012-influence-of-testing-parameters.pdf

  * How many replicate tests are needed to test cookstove performance
    and emissions? — Three is not always adequate.
    http://gadgillab.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/D-13-00075-Wang-et-al._final.pdf

  * Systematic and conceptual errors in standards and protocols for
    thermal performance of biomass stoves
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309689616_Systematic_and_conceptual_errors_in_standards_and_protocols_for_thermal_performance_of_biomass_stoves

  * Quality assurance for cookstoves testing centers: calculation of
    expanded uncertainty for WBT
    http://www.newdawnengineering.com/website/library/Stove%20Testing/Testing%20Protocols/American%20WBT,%20CCT,%20KPT/2014%20March%20WBT%204.2.x%20Uncertainty,%20Gorrity,%20M.pdf

  * Key factors of thermal efficiency test protocols
    http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1000.3936&rep=rep1&type=pdf

  * Towards a standard for clean solid-fuelled cookstoves

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274706950_Towards_a_standard_for_clean_solid-fuelled_cookstoves

Looking forward to your comments!

Best,

Xavier

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170214/43e85d20/attachment.html>