[Stoves] Fuel qualities as the limiting factor and ETHOS

Tue Jan 31 10:53:03 CST 2017

List, cc Tom

	I have just regained partial ability to send and receive.  Much of Monday was in preparing a slew of responses to messages received during ETHOS, some of which contain ETHOS material - but mostly are not influenced by ETHOS.  There are dozens more to do as well I am afraid.

	Tom’s summary on ETHOS and the GACC material is excellent.  What I send next may be duplicative. I will try to do some weeding.

	So please forgive material that I have written that may sound a lot like Tom’s.

Ron

> On Jan 30, 2017, at 6:01 PM, Tom Miles <tmiles at trmiles.com> wrote:
> 
> Crispin,
>  
> Dale Andreatta has been working on this approach for the last year. We saw a prototype last summer. Christa Roth and Paul Means did a nice job of presenting Dale’s work which you will see in the ETHOS 2017 archives when they get the presentations up.  
>  
> We had a very comprehensive ETHOS meeting this years. Just about everything we have discussed here in the last several weeks was discussed at the conference. There was a lot of discussion abut stoves contexts, user needs and user choice, lab and field testing methods including the appropriate uses, pros and cons of the WBT, modifications of the WBT, the CSI methods, concerns about tier categories, etc. Much broader discussion than in some years past.  Presentations were made by a wide variety of contributors including, but not limited to, partners of the global alliance. Lots of European, African and Asian participants. Many of the attendees and presenters are on this list. 
>  
> Very good and complete presentations by participants in the global alliance including Radha, Rainey and others. It was good to see extensive documentation which grew out of the fuels working group that we convened in preparation for the global alliance. All of the working groups of the ISO task reported and responded. It is clear that all of the Is tasks are still a work in progress and several will be issuing drafts for comment in the next few months. There were open invitations from all groups for people to participate in the process, even though there seem to be large numbers of participants in each group. The communications task group has promised to make information more broadly available. Once all these presentation are online it would be useful to discuss them here in a constructive fashion. 
>  
> One interesting experiment by Richard Grinnell in Guatemala was to open an improved cooking stoves store with 13-15 models to chose from. 5-6 are available for consumers to test. Extensive marketing and advertising including radio dramas and jingles. https://www.facebook.com/estufasmejoradasymas/ <https://www.facebook.com/estufasmejoradasymas/>
>  
> Tom   
>   <>
> From: Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org <mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org>] On Behalf Of Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
> Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2017 7:08 AM
> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org <mailto:stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>>
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Fuel qualities as the limiting factor, and getting rid of WBT (Was: Frank on helium surrogate)
>  
> Dear Frank
>  
> How is this: ‎the anthropologist comes from the field and tells you that the community will not spend time preparing fuel, and you can only plan on burning stick fuel. 
>  
> There is no problem attempting to sell a stove that needs novel fuel, or a processing method. But if you are told from the start not to bother, they will refuse to use it, it has to be treated as valuable information. 
>  
> When an industrial designer assess what to create, the customer sets the parameters. Apple famously held that people don't know what they want yet, they have to be told. Well stovers, a lot of cooks know what they want and what they don't.  
>  
> I think that's a good place to start. The designer can optimise the fuel chopping and sizing all they want: the community will refuse it.  
>  
> We can't work in isolation from the market. That's the point. 
>  
> Regards 
> Crispin 
>  
>  
> Dear Crispin, 
>  
> I agree with the stove designer/selector criteria for guiding the process making a stove. But before taking it into the field I suggest it be tested using the biomass available and biomass optimized for that stove. That to be included in the instructions. I realize people are going to use the stove as they wish. But knowing how to prepare the fuel for optimum performance is a start. 
>  
> Preparing the fuel for stoves takes time and energy and may seem silly and likely not going to be done. BUT if the fuel is the variable that now needs control we will never get cleaner stoves until this is done - no matter what stove they use. I think a process that sizes and dries, splits, chips - whatever the available fuel before use is the best next step to cleaner stoves. 
>  
> Frank 
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>> On Jan 29, 2017, at 2:41 AM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com <mailto:crispinpigott at outlook.com>> wrote:
>>  
>> Dear Frank
>>  
>> "If we don’t we are back to only the connected having the opportunity to market their stoves and all other backyard tinsnips designs don’t have a chance. Once that list is made you can add on all the additional requirements you want. The stove passes or doesn’t make the second list."
>>  
>> I think we are cleverer than that. It is quite reasonable to set before a stove designer/selector a set of 10 criteria of which half are hard science numbers or ranges and the other half are soft science requirements. 
>>  
>> A good designer can then create or pick a few candidate‎ technologies for verification and trials. 
>>  
>> The trials would be performed by experienced cooks and product reviewers from the target community. Cecil wants it to go in stages of 'weeding' and he wants it done before the technical evaluation. He often points out that the most acceptable and widely adopted product may not be the ones with the best technical specifications. 
>>  
>> That is why Toyota sells more cars than Lamborghini. 
>>  
>> Regards 
>> Crispin 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Stoves mailing list
>> 
>> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>> stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org <mailto: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 <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/ <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 <mailto:fShields at keithdaycompany.com>
>  
>  
>  
> franke at cruzio.com <mailto:franke at cruzio.com>
>  
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Stoves mailing list
> 
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org <mailto: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 <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/ <http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170131/5d8b76fe/attachment.html>