[Stoves] Differences in stove testing

[Ranyee Chiang]

Dear all,
The IWA meeting in the Hague was now 5 year ago, so I can see that it would be difficult to remember exactly what happened.  The issue of who provided input into the IWA is an important one, so I think it is important to correct misrepresentations of what happened.  During the IWA meeting, all the participants from about 20 countries went through the entire IWA draft line by line, word by word.  There were opportunities for people to exclude the Tiers at that time, but that was not raised by any of the participants.  The participants also developed resolutions which were reviewed and approved by all the participants at the end of the meeting.  The draft of the IWA was developed by mostly experts from the US.  There were also 3 webinars prior to the IWA meeting in the Hague to collect and integrate input from a wide group of stakeholders.  And then of course, during the IWA, participants were welcome to and did comment on every single part of the IWA.
It is still true that the current ISO process has more thorough than the IWA, but the process was not as Tami described in her e-mail.
Best regards,
Ranyee

From: "Bond, Tami C" <yark at illinois.edu<mailto:yark at illinois.edu>>
Date: February 13, 2017 at 11:41:27 PM EST
To: "Ronal W. Larson" <rongretlarson at comcast.net<mailto:rongretlarson at comcast.net>>
Cc: Discussion of biomass <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org<mailto:stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>>
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Differences in stove testing
Reply-To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org<mailto:stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>>
Hi Ron,
I so much appreciate your feedback!

To be clear, I am not looking for other metrics- some have already been proposed in WG1- although your discussions will likely be fruitful and possibly taken up later. I am ONLY, at this time, looking for precedents for defining an energy efficiency or thermal efficiency in the way that has been previously described, with a subtraction in the denominator. Other questions may come later; I believe it's wise to take one thing at a time- focus helps.

I leave the question of Tiers for further discussion on this list. It is not under discussion (within WG1) at this time, although perhaps it will come later.

Since you were not in The Hague to witness the process of the IWA, I suggest that perhaps you might not want to lean on it as support. No opportunities were offered to modify the IWA document, but only to provide resolutions preceding it. Therefore, even if the assembled company had wished to exclude the Tiers, they would have been unable to do so. The current ISO process has a more thorough discussion, and includes more international stakeholders, than did the IWA, which was largely written only by members of the United States delegation. I encourage you to wait for coming documents before claiming that any particular position is supported by the entire international community.

Regards,

Tami



[Global_Aliance_Clean_Cookstoves_blue_v23]<http://www.cleancookstoves.org/>

Ranyee Chiang, Ph.D.
Director of Standards, Technology and Fuels
1.202.448.4677<tel:1-202-448-4677>   Skype: ranyee.chiang<skype:ranyee.chiang?add>
rchiang at cleancookstoves.org<mailto:rchiang at cleancookstoves.org>



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170215/70560d9c/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3735 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170215/70560d9c/attachment.jpg>