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

[Xavier Brandao]

Dear Ranyee,

You didn't reply to my previous email of the 14/03.

The proceedings of the last ETHOS conference still haven't been 
published, and there is no information about the Round Robin Testing on 
the internet.
We would like to know the RRT more in detail.

Hence my few questions:

  * Is there a document, like a report, which presents and describes the
    Round Robin Testing?
  * What is the goal of the RRT?
  * When did the RRT start, and when do you expect it to finish?
  * Which protocol(s) will be used during that RRT? Which data is gonna
    be compared?
  * "The agreement that the testing centers made when making plans for
    the RRT is that participating centers would not be shared".
    Shouldn't the origin of the testing data be shared? Can we still
    know which organization is coordinating/managing the RRT?
  * When you say /"//protocols have already been changed and updated
    from the WBT"/, which protocols are you talking about?
  * Is the GACC now able to officially declare the WBT has serious
    flaws, and therefore should not be recommended to certify stoves or
    select them for programmatic purposes? This was why I meant by
    "taking a decision about the WBT".


Thanks again and best regards,

Xavier


On 3/14/17 00:29, Xavier Brandao wrote:
> Dear Ranyee,
>
> Thanks for the quick answer.
>
> /"//In my earlier message, I described how the protocols have already 
> been changed and updated from the WBT. So your question about making 
> decisions about the WBT doesn’t really reflect the current situation 
> since things have already moved beyond that."//
> /It is news to me.
> Unless I missed something, here is what you said in your previous reply:
> /"//We all recognize that there is room to improve, and that is 
> already the starting motivation for ongoing work by many people.  
> There are protocol improvements that are in progress and in 
> discussion, which will be published as soon as they are complete."/
>
> I have nowhere seen mentioned, in the discussions, on the GACC 
> website, or online, that the GACC had "moved beyond the WBT". It is 
> very good to hear.
>
> Nevertheless, the WBT 4.2.3 is still on top of the GACC testing 
> protocol page:
> http://cleancookstoves.org/technology-and-fuels/testing/protocols.html
>
> /"if you’d like more information on how to join that collaboration and 
> discussion, please let me know."/
> Yes, gladly, I would like to have more information. Sally Seitz, the 
> secretary of the TC 285, told me I couldn't join nor receive news from 
> the meetings, since France was not on the list of countries. She 
> advised me to contact the AFNOR, which I did, but didn't get an answer 
> so far, and I expect the process to be (if it is successful) long and 
> bureaucratic.
>
> /"If you’d like to contribute testing data to the RRT, please let me 
> know, since more data will help us have a better sense of the sources 
> of variation."/
> Sorry, I don't have any testing data to contribute to the RRT.
>
> I have a few questions:
>
>   * Is there a document, like a report, which presents and describes
>     the Round Robin Testing?
>   * What is the goal of the RRT?
>   * When did the RRT start, and when do you expect it to finish?
>   * Which protocol(s) will be used during that RRT? Which data is
>     gonna be compared?
>   * "The agreement that the testing centers made when making plans for
>     the RRT is that participating centers would not be shared".
>     Shouldn't the origin of the testing data be shared? Can we still
>     know which organization is coordinating/managing the RRT?
>   * When you say /"//protocols have already been changed and updated
>     from the WBT"/, which protocols are you talking about?
>   * Is the GACC now able to officially declare the WBT has serious
>     flaws, and therefore should not be recommended to certify stoves
>     or select them for programmatic purposes? This was why I meant by
>     "taking a decision about the WBT".
>
>
> Thanks again and best regards,
>
> Xavier
>
>
>
> On 3/13/17 15:11, Ranyee Chiang wrote:
>>
>> Dear Xavier,
>>
>> In my earlier message, I described how the protocols have already 
>> been changed and updated from the WBT.  So your question about making 
>> decisions about the WBT doesn’t really reflect the current situation 
>> since things have already moved beyond that.  The duration of the ISO 
>> process which has updated procedures is hard to predict, but the lab 
>> testing protocol has already passed one round of voting and it will 
>> be up for another round of voting within the next week or so.  After 
>> we know the results of that voting, we will know whether it is ready 
>> to publish or if there needs to be additional modification.  People 
>> have been working on it continuously over the last few years through 
>> the ISO Technical Committee 285 Working Groups to resolve 
>> longstanding issues and if you’d like more information on how to join 
>> that collaboration and discussion, please let me know.
>>
>> I do know that the ETHOS organizers plan to post the presentations 
>> from the conference, but I’m not sure about their timeline.  The 
>> budget for the RRT was only to ship stoves and fuels to testing 
>> centers, and the rest was based on volunteer contributions from the 
>> participating testing centers.  The agreement that the testing 
>> centers made when making plans for the RRT is that participating 
>> centers would not be shared, so that people would feel comfortable 
>> joining this learning opportunity.  Our next steps with the Round 
>> Robin Testing are to talk with participating testing centers 
>> one-on-one, since this was an exercise designed to help participating 
>> centers improve their efforts.  If you’d like to contribute testing 
>> data to the RRT, please let me know, since more data will help us 
>> have a better sense of the sources of variation.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Ranyee
>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170327/11c6b9f3/attachment.html>