<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>Am 09.02.2012 um 21:55 schrieb Kevin:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>Dear Christa<br><br># Are the Users actually using wet wood, </div></blockquote>CR: in the areas that I have worked the prevailing answer is YES, and with more scarcity of resources even those in Malawi that used to stockpile wood for the rainy season have stopped doing so as they can't afford it any longer<br><blockquote type="cite"><div>or is this the excuse the Stove Designer gives for why his stove doesn't work properly for the application? Was the stove actually designed to burn wet wood? </div></blockquote>CR: Most stoves are designed and tested with dry wood. the rocket-type stoves with the solid grates to preheat and predry the fuel do a good job handling moist fuel.<br><blockquote type="cite"><div>Don't the Users have enough experience with stoves and chimneys to know that burning wet wood in a stove that is not designed to burn wet wood will create creosote and tar deposits in teh chimney?<br></div></blockquote>CR: in the areas that I have worked the answer is simply NO. on the contrary: wet wood is often seen to 'last longer' as it does not burn up so quickly. <br><blockquote type="cite"><div><br>many users in developing countries collect their<br>fuel in short-term intervals (daily/weekly) and dont' build up a fuel<br>stock-pile, so the fuel has little chance to dry.<br>wet seasons in tropical climates don't help either to get or keep fuel<br>dry.<br><br># Why not provide a stove system that can actually deal with those conditions?<br></div></blockquote>CR: good question.... and a tall order </div><div>Yet: A stove is only a resaonably small part of the system stove-fuel-user-ventilation that determines indoor air quality, so far the focus is on emissions of a stove with dry fuel and correct use, but the discussions on the standards go into the right direction of testing abilties of stoves to handle 'realistic' fuels.</div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div><br>if the climate allows, I would rather have a cooking space as open as<br>possible and not have chimneys.<br><br># If you had a choice between<br>1: Acceptable Indoor Air Quality.<br>OR<br>2: An open cooking space with no chimney,<br>which would you choose?<br></div></blockquote>this to me is not an 'either-or' scenario: a good kitchen design can have more impact on acceptable air quality (levels of human exposure) than a stove (source of emissions) . </div><div>I always would advocate for point 2:, as it is low-maintenance and less depending on changes of user behaviour: knock the holes in the right places and guide the smoke out.. air exchanges do wonders to bring exposure levels down, even wihtout user training.</div><div> but so far we havent got a lot of data to inform us about the degree of importance of kitchen designs on exposure as this is expensive to measure and the current focus is on stove emissions.<br><blockquote type="cite"><div><br>I would also try to avoid the introduction of chimneys in cultures,<br>where there is no word for 'maintenance' in the local vocabulary,<br><br># Do they have words for "Stoves Venting into the Living Space", "Poor Indoor Air Quality", "Health Hazard", "Premature Death", etc? :-) </div></blockquote>CR: in malawi where I have worked most, these concepts are rare and mostly not existing. </div><div>for many the health aspect is not a 'sales' argument to get a stove. That is what 'we' think, but does not rank high in many peoples reasons to acquire a stove. <br><blockquote type="cite"><div>Clearly, if the 3 stone fire in the living space is causing health problems, and the USer wishes to improve on the situation, the User must make changes, like, getting a better stove system AND learning how to use it properly. </div></blockquote>WEll, only if there is awareness. I have talked to many users in Malawi who do NOT see smoke as a (health) problem, on the contrary I have heard often 'smoke is good for us', 'smoke preserves the ....' <br><blockquote type="cite"><div>An appropriate training program MUST be included with the hardware that is supplied to deal with the problem. If the User does not want to learn how to use the new system properly, then it is destined to fail.<br></div></blockquote>CR: hitting the nail right on the head, but these days most focus is on scaling up numbers of stoves out there, which does not necessarily translate into 'stoves correctly used'. the users are the weakest tlink between 'stove sold' and 'impact through good use'.</div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><br>as<br>the concept then is unlikely to be deeply rooted.<br>depends where you are<br>regards christa<br><br># I would suggest that the most important thing is a clear statement of priorities. There is no such thing as "One Stove Fits All". Stoves must be designed to suit local circumstances, and the cooking/heating task to be accomplished.<br></div></blockquote>CR: correct! so first get the priorities of your target group, then make a choice of stoves available that would suit different needs and economic situations.<br><blockquote type="cite"><div><br># Concerning Indoor Air Quality resulting from the use of "Improved Stoves" that vent the products of combustion into the living space, would you know of any that meet air quality and safety requirements necessary to be approved for use inside a home in Germany, Canada or the US? If not, why are stoves that are unacceptable for use in Germany, Canada, or the US considered acceptable for use in poorer homes in Under Developed Countries?</div></blockquote> maybe purchasing power????</div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><br>Best wishes,<br><br>Kevin Chisholm<br><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#006312"><br></font></div></blockquote></div><br></body></html>