[Stoves] Must reed: Re: [stove] ProPublica article out

[Xavier Brandao]

Dear Paul,

 

Thanks for sharing this very good paper.

It brings a good reflection upon all those years. Yet it still didn’t answer the question: why didn’t it work?

Because the improved cookstoves were not adopted. But why?

 

The stoves were not adopted because they were not good enough. The problem is not a problem of adoption, of customers. The stoves were, and still are the problem. If the first Iphone was 3000 USD, with an autonomy of 20 minutes, and very slow when navigating, no one would have bought it -> back to the R&D and engineering department, try again and better.

 

For the improved cookstove sector:

-          A lot of investment in combustion and stove R&D was needed: it never happened

-          The GACC needed to address the problem of the WBT as soon as there were concerns with it. The GACC never did. Even now, July 2018, the first testing protocol on the GACC website is still the WBT. Results: the WBT kept testers and manufacturers into a swamp of under-performing stoves with over-performing results.

-          Poor products were developed, tested, distributed in villages, and ended-up like Cummins stoves.

 

One needs to admit his/her mistake, before being able to correct them and move forward. This never happened.

There’s little mystery behind that global failure.

 

Best,

 

Xavier

 

 

 

De : Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] De la part de Paul Anderson
Envoyé : jeudi 12 juillet 2018 23:12
À : Stoves and biofuels network
Objet : [Stoves] Must reed: Re: [stove] ProPublica article out

 

Stovers,

I thank Kirk Smith for getting the ProPublica article to our attention as soon as it became available.

Read.    Perhaps weep.    Work harder.   Learn about the opposition to biomass stoves.

Personally, I am disappointed that there was not a glimmer of recognition of what the TLUD micro-gasifiers HAVE ACCOMPLISHED and have shown to be possible in terms of (A) quite clean cookstoves, (B) STRONG user acceptance, and (C) that carbon credits ARE working with TLUD gasifiers.   The authors (and those who were interviewed and quoted) seem to be totally unaware of the REPORTED IN 2016 success in the Deganga pilot study with 11,000 Champion TLUD stoves (see    www.drtlud.com/deganga2016  )    And lesser known is that the  number of households has invreased to about 40,000.   And we are looking for funding for scale up for the larger numbers.

But this article will make it even more difficult to get funding for scale-up of the TLUD stove success story.   However, if it can stop wasted money on the UNsuccessful stove-types that are indicated (but not named) in the article, I am not against that.  

This is now mid-2018.   The GACC will claim success to reach 100 million households by 2020 on the basis of LPG stoves in India.   And then what????   

Read the article.   It is worthy of some discussion here on the Stoves Listserv..

Paul




Doc  /  Dr TLUD  /  Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email:  psanders at ilstu.edu
Skype:   paultlud    Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website:  www.drtlud.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20180713/2ba514aa/attachment.html>