<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000'>Andrew etal<br><br> I know of Jock's response just now, and am avoiding it as I don't think there is a great difference here. I think Jock is perfectly comfortable with village level specialization - which you (and many of us) are favoring - when feasible.<br><br> See few inserts below.<br><br><hr id="zwchr"><b>From: </b>"Andrew C. Parker" <acparker@xmission.com><br><b>To: </b>biochar-policy@yahoogroups.com, "clement doyer" <cdoyer@yahoo.com>, rongretlarson@comcast.net, "Discussion of biomass cooking stoves" <stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org><br><b>Cc: </b>"Jock" <jg45@mac.com>, "Nathaniel Mulcahy" <worldstove@gmail.com><br><b>Sent: </b>Monday, June 25, 2012 5:19:52 PM<br><b>Subject: </b>Re: [Stoves] [biochar-policy] Re: Stoves<br><br>On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:23:41 -0600, <rongretlarson@comcast.net> wrote:<br><br>> I find the idea that stoves must only be sold, and that all stoves must <br>> include a profit rent, to be a true perversion.<br><br> <strong>[RWL: I just want it clear that the two lines above are from Jock - not me, as might be inferred if read quickly].<br><br>[from Andrew: </strong>Jock, <span style="font-weight: bold;"> </span>That is fine utopian philosophizing, but realistically, is everyone <br>supposed to build their own improved stove? Specialization exists even at <br>the village level. Is the village stovemaker supposed to build stoves for <br>free?<br> <span style="font-weight: bold;">[RWL: I urge Andrew (and others) to look at the business model of WorldStove (Nat receiving this). Nat has figured out a nice barter system - where a (relatively) expensive (but long-lived,clean, and efficient) stove is paid off in months (not years) with little or no up front expense by the user. This is done with local assembly and continual support. <br> So, there are more than the self-construction and import business models on the table. Nat has figured out the carbon credit angle as well.]<br></span><br>Profit is payment to the risk taker (the entrepreneur, the investor), just <br>as one pays for labor, goods or money. How is that a perversion?<br> <span style="font-weight: bold;">[RWL: It is not - and the above (barter, free trial, carbon credit) business approach is available to other risk takers (entrepreneurs and investors)</span>.<span style="font-weight: bold;">]</span> <span style="font-weight: bold;">Ron</span><br></div></body></html>