[Stoves] Various WBT equations; A matter of principle

Frank Shields franke at cruzio.com
Fri Jan 20 10:28:50 CST 2017


Dear Tami,  Crispin, and Stovers.

<see below>

> On Jan 19, 2017, at 3:55 PM, Bond, Tami C <yark at illinois.edu> wrote:
> 
> Hi Crispin,
> 
> Just to clarify, I am not saying that one should wait for any ISO standard, nor promising that you or any country will agree with it. The standards process takes quite long and it’s wise to have ways forward before it concludes. 
> 
> I did say that within the working group I (and you) participate in, the criticisms of efficiency are being aired, and that I support discussion of those critiques. 

The problem is is that there is no Efficiency for a stove. Only efficiencies of a ’system’ of fuel, operation, combustion chamber, cooking utensils, cooking process and task performed. If the group is trying to come up with A test method for a stove that gives the best efficiency we will be waiting for many more years before things get turned around. 

> 
> I don’t want to get too much into the past process because we have only the choice to go forward yet learn from the past. 
> 
> Any work done, including yours, may inform the development of future documents or standards. Ron requested positive suggestions for ways forward. I hope to see some and I think I have seen some, including your suggestions for testing protocols. Positive proposals have a much better chance of gaining traction than critiques of existing methods. 

One positive proposal is a re-Look at the problem. Clearly define what the goal is and the many variables needing control along the way. We need a lab system of procedures on a stove that actually does well to predict field results. There is no good stove and better stove. Only a better stove for the available fuel and cooking task with all six variables controlled along the way. There is no single method - if thats what everyone is trying for. We need a Procedure set up to run stoves through  to determine best for a specific location. OR we need stoves pre-tested to determine and record their limits for biofuels. Setting up this step-by-step procedure along with their developed methods is what the group should be doing.  

> 
> I would remind everyone who has an interest that in the final ballot, each country has one vote— no matter how many experts are appointed to its technical committee— and, at least in this realm, the way to support or reject any particular thing that you like or don’t like is to interact with your national standards committee’s representatives. 

Introducing a different approach (than looking for the one test) would create chaos within the group. A better approach is to start another group with more like interest. I have been there many times and you don’t want the deciding group having members in far corners. Its better to have approved another bad standard that will later been seen to amount to nothing.   Later people are then more willing to change. Its just the normal way slow progress happens. Soooo Slow.

regards

Frank


> 
> Regards,
> 
> Tami
> _______________________________________________
> Stoves mailing list
> 
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
> 
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
> 
> for more Biomass Cooking Stoves,  News and Information see our web site:
> http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
> 
> 

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







More information about the Stoves mailing list