[Stoves] stoves and credits again

Ronal W. Larson rongretlarson at comcast.net
Fri Sep 22 16:34:31 CDT 2017


Nikhil:

	See below.


> On Sep 22, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Nikhil Desai <pienergy2008 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Ron: 
> 
> What makes you believe that users of biomass-quelled stoves are predominantly growers (of biomass)? 

	RWL:   Replace “quelled” with “fueled”.  I’m sure I based my comment mostly on twenty plus years on this list. 

	 But looking around a bit, I found that confirmed sort of in general and specifically in Ghana in this recent paper:  
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7036 <http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7036>.
	My Google search found this one for Paraguay - which (only skimmed) seems to agree:  http://depts.washington.edu/sefspcmi/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Johnny-Bruce-Case-Study-Final2.pdf <http://depts.washington.edu/sefspcmi/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Johnny-Bruce-Case-Study-Final2.pdf>
	Also this from FAO -(not as much on urban-rural) - was new to me,  has some DALY data:  http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0789e/a0789e09.htm <http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0789e/a0789e09.htm>

	Not sure if you disagree, but if so - why?
> 
> Saw the figures for urban charcoal markets in Sub-Saharan Africa lately?
	[RWL:   Not sure of your point - but yes char-use if predominant in urban areas.  And in many of those cases, the production is illegal.  Char-use in any setting is my main reason for being on this list.   I still believe wood use is appreciably larger than char use globally.

	This had some interesting comparison data:  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK385522/table/p45_T1.1/?report=objectonly <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK385522/table/p45_T1.1/?report=objectonly>

	I also believe that most charcoal is made by folk who are also “growers”  (meaning they are not living in urban areas)

	You believe what on this topic?

> Or looked at non-household cooking (in my view roughly 50% of cooking energy consumption worldwide)? 
 
	[RWL:  apparently I am to believe (re Andrew’s question below) that “non-household cooking” which uses biomass as its fuel ARE NOT also growers?  (My saying yes to Andrew’s question would say the opposite, I agree).  First I strongly doubt your 50% worldwide, but especially so for those using biomass.
	I have given up looking for data on this.  This site didn’t help:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooking#Home-cooking_and_commercial_cooking <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooking#Home-cooking_and_commercial_cooking>

	My guess is that world wide, less than 25% (half of your 50%) of meals are non-household, and where the fuel in the non-household is biomass, the number would drop below 10%.    Now adding the conditional about the supply of fuel also being growers to my 10% guesstimate - I pass.  My guess is that most such entrepreneurs do some growing but a majority of their biomass fuel is purchased from suppliers of wood and charcoal who are non-urban (therefore also likely also growers of biomass).  This has gotten too deep into qualifications and definitions.  But I still stand by my “yes” in answering Andrew’s query. (rephrased) “Are the persons who depend on biomass-quelled stoves also growers?"

	I look forward to your differing and supporting citations.  But also what difference it makes in improving stoves - and (in my case) charcoal-making stoves?  For this last category,  I contend that larger (commercial) users of biomass stoves should be the ones most likely to want char-making (cleaner, safer, more efficient, and income-generating) stoves.

Ron


> Nikhil
> 
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Ronal W. Larson <rongretlarson at comcast.net <mailto:rongretlarson at comcast.net>> wrote:
> Andrew and list:
>>>  
>> 
>> There appears to be a win win situation here and I gather there is
>> still a vast part of equatorial Africa where annual burning  takes
>> place. However it brings me to another reason I like the idea, though
>> not the practicalities, of a householder-subsistance farmer being paid
>> a subsidy funded by the developed world. The trouble is I have a
>> parochial view and not a good worldview of what types of persons
>> depend on biomass fuelled stoves. Are they also predominantly growers?
> 
> 	[RWL9:  Yes to Andrew’s last question.  I disagree with Andrew calling himself “parochial” - when he supports (as do I) the ethics of “a subsidy funded by the developed world”.
> 
> 	  
> [RWL10:   Agree totally.  And I think this is what will eventually kill the geoengineering technology that is often placed ahead of biochar - BECCS.  In BECCS, as with “clean coal”, the CO2 from combustion (never pyrolysis) is placed, as  liquid, deep underground.   Major expenses needed to protect the world’s soil are not needed for biochar.  Soil quality is closely linked to carbon content - and biochar does this with no penalty - while apparently being the cleanest and most efficient of all possible solid-fuel stoves.
> 
> `Andrew - thanks for your above rebuttal to Crispin.
> 
> Ron
>>  
> 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170922/00110800/attachment.html>


More information about the Stoves mailing list