[Stoves] solar cooker response (changing thread name)

[Crispin Pemberton-Pigott]

Dear Nikhil

Efficiency is not a mindless exercise. Neither is it an obsession.

Induction stoves are extremely efficient. That is a good thing. Because they are efficiency, literally, they are highly controllable. That is a bonus. They are not yet programmable but that is only a matter time (programmed to cook a particular meal of a particular size following a pre-approved sequence). This is already done when producing baked ceramic products.

>Another was that it puts out less heat to the room than does a flame. Makes a difference in Indian summers 10a-6p at least.

That is a direct result of its inherent efficient.

>The binding constraint in modern energy transition is financing the investment on the individual user side, not the corporate supply or user sides.

The cost of the energy carrier is borne by the consumer, ultimately, so in a sense it is the individual user’s investment, even if it is unequally secured.

>The sooner we dump physical efficiency as a key guiding metric, the better.

That’s silly. It is not only one of the key guiding metrics, from the POV of capital cost, manufacturing processes, materials sourcing and recycling, feeding the beast, durability+repairs, number required to service all pots – everything is based on the frugal use of resources. A 1957 Chevy can be repaired indefinitely. A 1974 Beetle can’t. It matters.

To speak of people being poor and cooking systems at the same time immediately includes the concept of cost-efficiency, whether that is time-efficient, cost efficient, quantity-appropriate-to-the-pot and so on.

Even with words we should be efficient.

Regards
Crispin

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170613/a17dbea2/attachment.html>