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

Tue Feb 14 17:11:36 CST 2017

Dear Xavier,

Please see below:

> On Feb 14, 2017, at 11:11 AM, Xavier Brandao <xvr.brandao at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 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?
> 
The WBT worked well for the research Dean and others did when establishing gaps and air flow etc. What stove physical makeup will get the most energy where it is wanted. It only became a problem when the intent was changed to determine the ‘best’ stove for all uses and places. That with no consideration to the different fuels that would be used.Different than the processed wood cut to perfect length and dry used in their study.

So i guess I am not talking about the WBT but a very modified WBT for a new, different purpose.    

> dditionally 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
The problem with ‘contextual’ studies (if I understand it right) is that the study is only good for the location the study took place. Then you take the science crew down the road to the next village and conduct a study there and on to every town and village. Within a study you determine the 10% producing the most smoke and have a little talk with them to clean up their act. And the air becomes cleaner. This will work but not a workable solution to the problem. More years about to be wasted. : )

> several WBT metrics are invalid, as Crispin highlighted many times

They are valid for the original intent (stove development) but not for extended the usefulness to outside the lab where new variables (uncontrolled) exist. 

> there are big thermodynamic uncertainties (viz. variable steam production and boiling point determination)
Thermodynamics will never work in these small combustion chambers. We have a column about 45 cm high and 20 cm diameter where changes occur in every cubic centimeter within in every second of time from beginning to end of cycle. Forget it. We need to just hit the basics. The six box system covers the basics we need to work with. 
> there are questions about the rationale of some calculations, questions raised by Zhang et al.
oh yes - lots of them….

> 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.
> 
eliminate them and they are answered.

Box 1) 
What ever is being planned for a testing protocol for stoves it -needs- to have the biomass fuel controlled via chemical and physical properties. It needs to be prepared as a homogenous fuel by size, shape and known combustion related properties. The more heterogenous it is the larger the combustion chamber needs to be before we can come up with a predictable outcome. I am, and have been, waiting for people to get on board to getting this classification system started and willing to do what I can to help.  Yet no-one even talks about its need.  

Regards

Frank

> 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 <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/ <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 <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 <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 <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 <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 <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 <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 <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 <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274706950_Towards_a_standard_for_clean_solid-fuelled_cookstoves>
> 
> Looking forward to your comments!
> 
> Best,
> 
> Xavier
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 

Thanks

Frank
Frank Shields
Gabilan Laboratory
Keith Day Company, Inc.
1091 Madison Lane
Salinas, CA  93907
(831) 246-0417 cell
(831) 771-0126 office
fShields at keithdaycompany.com

franke at cruzio.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170214/eb0d0390/attachment.html>