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

[Xavier Brandao]

Dear Ron,

You are raising interesting points.

Thanks for sharing the documents of the Lima consensus. It was in 2011. 
Now we are in 2017. Signatories might have changed mind.

Please note that there is also a certain state of mind with people 
working on the ISO: "ISO standards are good for the stove sector. 
Therefore we have to reach an agreement, as soon as possible. Also we 
put a lot of work in it, so we'd like to be done with it."

This is understandable, but one should not take decisions in haste, 
without firm scientific basis. Once the ISO standards will be set, it'll 
be too late. There wont be a way to change them, or it'll take years and 
years.

So, OK to set standards for stoves, but not at all cost. That's what 
Crispin has been trying to say, but he has too often be seen as a 
hindrance.My opinion: I'd rather have no standards than bad standards. 
Bad standards would be devastating. It doesn't matter if it takes time, 
ISO standards have to be scientifically valid, or they should not exist.

If they are still nowadays supporting the WBT, I'd like to hear the 
signatories of the consensus tell us on this list why the WBT is a good 
protocol, and why we should keep using it.


"And, from what I hear, essentially one person alone (Crispin) is 
critiquing it."

Crispin is not the only one, trust me. We are a big group, and it is 
growing. His critics of the WBT find an echo especially with the project 
implementers, who find the WBT inadequate, and are struggling with 
testing. Implementers are quiet on the Stove List, they are very busy 
with day-to-day operations. So was I during more than 3 years when I was 
with Prakti in India. Plus, the state of mind of implementers is: 
"anyways, Crispin is on top of that, he is leading the fight, and people 
in the TC 285 are probably discussing these matters. This is the job of 
researchers, this is not our job."

Please find a list of the studies where the issues with the WBT have 
been mentioned or studied in detail:

//

·/Fuzzy interval propagation of uncertainties in experimental analysis 
for improved and traditional three–stone fire cookstoves, /Riva F., 
Lombardi F., Pavarini C., Colombo E., 07/09/2016

·/Key differences of performance test protocols for household biomass 
cookstoves, /Twenty-Second Domestic Use of Energy, IEEE 2014:1–11, Zhang 
Y, Pemberton-Pigott C, Zhang Z, Ding H, Zhou Y, Dong R., 2014

//

·/Performance testing for monitoring improved biomass stove 
interventions: experiences of the Household Energy and Health Project/. 
Energy Sustainable//Dev 2007; 11:57–70. Bailis R, Berrueta V, Chengappa 
C, Dutta K, Edwards R, Masera O, et al., 2007, //

·/The shortcomings of the U.S. protocol/, Robert Pendelton Taylor, 2009

·/Influence of testing parameters on biomass stove performance and 
development of an improved testing protocol/. Energy Sustainable Dev 
2012; 16:3–12. L’Orange C, DeFoort M, Willson B., 2012

·/How many replicate tests are needed to test cookstove performance and 
emissions? — Three is not always adequate/. Energy Sustainable Dev 2014; 
20:21–9. Wang Y, Sohn MD., 2014

·/Systematic and conceptual errors in standards and protocols for 
thermal performance of biomass stoves/, Zhang Z, Zhang Y, Zhou Y, Riaz 
A., Pemberton-Pigott C, Annegarn H., Dong R., 2014

·/Quality assurance for cookstoves testing centers: calculation of 
expanded uncertainty for WBT/, Gorrity M., Trujillo G., 2013

I sent you some papers by email.I believe there are other sources as 
well, I'll keep gathering more data.

To my knowledge, none of these papers has been discussed and criticized 
on a scientific basis by WBT supporters. I am assuming it is because 
they make a point.

"I contend that lab testing is imperative. I contend that there is no 
better lab test that boiling water.Who has a better approach?"

There are other protocols for lab testing: at Prakti, we have been using 
a slightly modified version of the Heterogenous Testing Protocol. We use 
contextual testing as well. I believe the Uncontrolled Cooking Test and 
the CSI Water Heating Test are good as well. They do everything a WBT does.

Best,

Xavier

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170120/a3d185e1/attachment.html>