[Stoves] TLUD stoves and tests

Xavier Brandao xav.brandao at gmail.com
Tue Jul 17 11:01:17 CDT 2018


Dear Kirk,

 

We could also call « arguing »: « sound scientific discussion ».

Researchers are arguing about climate change, Artifical Intelligence, the size of the universe … All that is necessary, I believe.

 

The « WBT argument » that has been going on « for years » is more like Crispin hammering the fact that the WBT is not reliable, with little to no reaction, and Ron strongly defending the WBT because of the tiers and denominator equation.

Lately, all the evidence against the WBT has been compiled, discussed, and has not been refuted.

We also talked about alternative protocols at length.

 

“I had a choice and I chose to work on the TLUD.”

Very good. We are many different people, we can all work on many different things, and share our findings.

 

None of the above discussions prevented anyone to work on the stove they like. Instead they gave them full information and warning about the situation with tests.

I spend very little of my time talking about the WBT, I’m busy with other things.

 

“If you were working on tests that could be used for all cooking vessels instead of just a pot of water I might abide with you”

The CSI does that, normally. It is contextual. Crispin might be able to give more clarifications here. Kirk, have you tried this protocol?

 

I believe the new standard allows different cooking vessels as well?

 

“both disliked and liked tests”

You mean unreliable and reliable.

 

Indeed, now is the time to move forward. We want to move forward. We want to drive, drive, drive, fast. But it’s good that we checked first if the car was safe or if it was heading in the right direction.

 

The ProPublica article sums it up well: only little progress has been achieved by the cookstove sector, after decades of hard work.

The cause for that certainly wasn’t overthinking, was it?

 

Best,


Xavier

 

 

 

De : Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] De la part de Kirk H.
Envoyé : mardi 17 juillet 2018 03:46
À : Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
Objet : [Stoves] TLUD stoves and tests

 

Xavier,

 

The main idea in my response on 7-13 was that well designed TLUDs are excellent stoves, capable of suppling steady, efficient, and low particulate heat for cooking purposes.  As far as arguing over tests is concerned, some have indeed been arguing for years.  This was/is over the portion of the WBT which measures the efficiency of getting heat into a pot of water, which to me is very limited.  I had a choice and I chose to work on the TLUD.  

 

The next part of my statement is important:   “This especially for tests which have more to do with the cooking vessel than with the stove itself.”  If you were working on tests that could be used for all cooking vessels instead of just a pot of water I might abide with you, but not for a test the results of which are of no value for anything but the test pot of water.  Do we have a test for stir frying in a wok?  Nope.  Only a pot of water.  Yet woks are extensively used for cooking.  And it doesn’t even matter if we use a wood stove.  The cooking vessel tests would get the same results over a natural gas burner as long as all the variables like skirt, lid, and pot stand are held the same.  These tests have to do with the cooking vessel not the capabilities of the stove.  

 

I can abide with the WBT or WHT as long as it is made clear that the disputed portion includes only the efficiency of getting heat into a pot of water, but says nothing about other much used cooking vessels, such as putting soup in the pot instead of water, or woks, griddles, ovens, etc.  Also I note that these cooking vessel tests can use any heat source, like natural gas or electrical, and except for a limited relationship to fire power, do not measure the qualities of the stove itself.  Measurements concerning the stove are taken by the sensors and filters.

 

Both the disliked and liked tests have a very limited scope.  How about looking into some more versatile tests that are not limited to a pot of water.  How would we test the efficiency of getting the heat into a wok being used for stir frying?  Perhaps we could use an infrared thermometer to measure the temperature of the food and end the test when it all reaches a temperature that kills bacteria.  How about testing the stove and the cooking vessel separately, so each has its own values?  That would give the consumer a much better preview of both, and more knowledge to pick and choose.

 

TLUDs are very capable stoves, effectively heating whatever cooking vessel under which they are placed.

 

Kirk H.

 

 

Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986>  for Windows 10

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20180717/536f1182/attachment.html>


More information about the Stoves mailing list