[Stoves] Stoves Digest, Vol 97, Issue 3

Tue Sep 4 18:40:25 CDT 2018

Hi Norbert, i can understand that particulate matter may be unwanted in dense areas, but from a Global Warming perspective those areas may be extremely taxing for the rest of the planet, perhaps those areas could be gradually emptied of people, - encouragement to move elsewhere, areas of high density replaced with trees etc.
Similiar situation in Australia at the moment, draught area farmers in Queensland want to cut down their Mulga trees, - basically the only trees, the Milga is an extremely drought resistant slow growing tree that is all that stands between the drought situation and desert.
Traditionally the Mulga was cut to feed the cattle in drought times but the Mulga has become so de-populated that the Govt has made cutting illegal.
Coal funded conservative political parties want to get votes from farmers by telling the farmers to cut their Mulga, - of course next year, another drought will come but no Mulga, but in the meantime the land will have degraded because no Mulga, so all their cattle will die.
 - The answer is to lower stocking rates to adjust to the newer drier future.
A fair comparison?

Cheers,
Geoff.

> On 5 Sep 2018, at 4:00 am, stoves-request at lists.bioenergylists.org wrote:
> 
> Send Stoves mailing list submissions to
> 	stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
> 
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	stoves-request at lists.bioenergylists.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	stoves-owner at lists.bioenergylists.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Stoves digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Re: Stoves Digest, Vol 96, Issue 19 (Geoff Thomas)
>   2. Fwd:  The Economist: Wood-burning stoves, the picturesque
>      polluters (Nikhil Desai)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 14:01:29 +1000
> From: Geoff Thomas <wind at iig.com.au>
> To: stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Stoves Digest, Vol 96, Issue 19
> Message-ID: <20CB7197-E0BD-46DF-9764-847D3769A61F at iig.com.au>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> 
> I find it hard to credit that a double burning wood stove emits three times more than a lorry, - unless the Lorry is turned off, - then perhaps.
> However, the main thing is that if the heat is provided by electricity, mostly generated by coal, then the coal emissions will be as bad as the lorry when running, coal generally achieving 30+ percent efficiency, the wood stove conspicuously more than that, - just the burning of the smoke gas is 30%, besides, the coal stays in the ground, whereas the wood would otherwise break down and return it?s  carbon dioxide to the atmosphere if not burned, so a wood fire is essentially carbon neutral, whereas coal fired electricity is certainly not.
> That a soul less electric heater is not as nice as a wood fire is an extra feel good for the wood fire carbon neutral enthusiast.
> 
> Of course the wood fire should be certified double burning, - smog issues to one side it will give out much more heat than the illegal one, so use less wood, - wood is not cheap, so it is to the benefit of the stove owner to have a compliant stove in the long run, - not enforcing regulations by the Govt bodies is the culprit in this situation, possibly Climate deniers are influential in those govt bodies, - that sort of insanity should be treated by putting those govt. officials to work - in a Coal mine.
> 
> Geoff Thomas.
> 
> 
>> On 31 Aug 2018, at 4:00 am, stoves-request at lists.bioenergylists.org wrote:
>> 
>> Today's Topics:
>> 
>> 1. The Economist: Wood-burning stoves, the picturesque polluters
>>    (Nikhil Desai)
>> 
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 10:15:36 -0400
>> From: Nikhil Desai <pienergy2008 at gmail.com>
>> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
>> 	<stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>> Cc: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>,	Cecil Cook
>> 	<cec1863 at gmail.com>, Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu>,	Anil
>> 	Rajvanshi <anilrajvanshi at gmail.com>, 	Xavier Brandao
>> 	<xav.brandao at gmail.com>
>> Subject: [Stoves] The Economist: Wood-burning stoves, the picturesque
>> 	polluters
>> Message-ID:
>> 	<CAK27e=mgqTggBSg6nbs9cKKKNt+MxjP8s_5ddP9_Xqcia21_xw at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>> 
>> This suggests a way forward - taxing wood stoves.  Wood-burners must "go
>> back out of fashion", meaning if not stoves, the people in whose name.
>> 
>> Nikhil
>> 
>> https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/08/27/wood-burning-stoves-the-picturesque-polluters
>> 
>> 
>> Earlier this year ministers also suggested that new stoves should face much
>> stricter limits on emissions. Yet even the stoves that pass this new
>> standard, labelled as eco-friendly, emit three times more particles per
>> hour than a lorry. An article in the *British Medical Journal* called for a
>> ?polluter-pays? tax on new stoves, to equal the associated health costs,
>> which it put at ?889 ($1,150) per stove each year in inner London.
>> 
>> The biggest problem is enforcing the rules in the smoke-control zones, such
>> as central London. In theory, residents who use non-compliant stoves or
>> burn the wrong fuel face a ?1,000 fine. But unclear guidelines and local
>> authorities? weak powers of enforcement mean that compliance is largely
>> voluntary. The black smoke will continue to waft from the chimneys of
>> well-to-do homes until wood-burners go back out of fashion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2018 18:20:50 -0400
> From: Nikhil Desai <pienergy2008 at gmail.com>
> To: Andrew Heggie <aj.heggie at gmail.com>
> Cc: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> 	<stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Subject: [Stoves] Fwd:  The Economist: Wood-burning stoves, the
> 	picturesque polluters
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAK27e=kL7qQ0_L3oTRUjpzMdOHfFg4BFPxG6DXBLibbViuzFXQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> Andrew:
> 
> Re:  "also eliminate other sources in the local environment."
> 
> a) Some of it is natural; b) if you drop the equitoxicity assumption, these
> % shares are irrelevant. Maybe it is more important to drop BC from diesel
> than to shut down wood stoves for home heating.
> 
> Remember, in the Kirk Smith worldview, it is only the PM2.5 from solid
> fuels that HAP premature deaths are attributed to.
> 
> That there is no observed quantity and duration of exposures to just HAP
> PM2.5 is one issue with GBD "estimates". But more fundamentally, how can
> one eliminate non-fuel PM2.5 - not just from tobacco smoke, a known
> carcinogen, but also all the emissions from foods, livestock management,
> "natural" dust - and even PM5 and PM10, which includes pollen and such -
> and achieve a target reduction in "dosage"?
> 
> Now, HAPIT does pretend to adjust for PM2.5 Ambient Air Pollution (AAP) in
> its computation of aDALYs. Without going into the jugglery of  math and
> data there, or the issue of equitoxicity of PM2.5, causality of PM2.5,
> etc., the simple question is, "Where will gas penetration in cooking not be
> countered by increase in concentrations from sources other than solid fuels
> for household cooking?"
> 
> Which is why the search for an emission-based "cleanliness" rating a la ISO
> fails to pass a laugh test on first principles.
> 
> The only objective of a clean cookstove - like any other combustion device
> with organic fuels - is a significant improve in air quality, toward some
> contextually defined levels. The rest is bizarre song-and-dance of the cult
> of environmental public health.
> 
> With air quality measured in terms of particular constituents, NOT this
> idiocy called PM2.5.
> 
> Nikhil
> 
> ------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Andrew Heggie <aj.heggie at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 29 Aug 2018 at 22:41, Nikhil Desai <pienergy2008 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> This suggests a way forward - taxing wood stoves.  Wood-burners must "go
>> back out of fashion", meaning if not stoves, the people in whose name.
>>> 
>>> Nikhil
>>> 
>>> https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/08/27/wood-
>> burning-stoves-the-picturesque-polluters
>> 
>> 
>> I'm hardly surprised there has been no interest on [stoves] about this
>> as it is too UK centric, it also relates to a wealthy nation's
>> lifestyle choices rather than an absolute need for wood burning. Most
>> people using wood for cooking have no choice. BTW I operate a wood
>> burner in winter and it wouldn't impact on my finances greatly if I
>> used natural gas instead.
>> 
>> 
>> There is a graphic in the article which I find interesting as it shows
>> an overall halving of particulates in the period 1990 to present and
>> I'm sure I lived through much worse before that.
>> 
>> It shows a drastic  reduction in particulates from agriculture in the
>> period 1990 to 95 which must reflect the ban on cereal straw burning
>> post harvest.
>> 
>> Again whilst the non specific "other" sources of particulates has
>> declined similarly  I note it contributes about a third so if it were
>> possible to reduce all particulates from domestic and industrial
>> combustion and road transport to zero the background would still be
>> 30% of the current total.
>> 
>> This reflects a bit on what we discussed in the Malawi study you
>> cannot expect biomass cooking being replaced by "clean" cookers to
>> have any effect unless you also eliminate other sources in the local
>> environment.
>> 
>> Andrew
>> 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20180903/cf839870/attachment-0001.html>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Subject: Digest Footer
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Stoves mailing list
> 
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
> 
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
> 
> 
> for more Biomass Cooking Stoves,  News and Information see our web site:
> http://www.bioenergylists.org/
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> End of Stoves Digest, Vol 97, Issue 3
> *************************************