[Stoves] Fuel qualities as the limiting factor, and getting rid of WBT (Was: Frank on helium surrogate)

[Ronal W. Larson]

Crispin and list

	Has this particular anthropologist telling you the facts reported below also asked the community their opinion on the possibility that it is or will soon be possible to make money from the production of charcoal?   And maybe even put that char in their own ground with (maybe, but TBD) 50% improvement in yield? 

	Or if he/she has not asked about income generation while cooking (including fuel preparation - possibly of small twigs), what should Frank ask of the anthropologist?

	And if the anthropologist (as in your story) says not to bother, but there is counter evidence - what should Frank do?

	What answer should Frank and the anthropologist expect from this community that you are sure “will refuse it” - but have not yet been asked any appropriate question?  

Ron


> On Jan 29, 2017, at 8:07 AM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com> wrote:
> 
> 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
>> 
>> 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 <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
> 
> 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/
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170131/26f8590e/attachment.html>