<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.xmsonormal, li.xmsonormal, div.xmsonormal
{mso-style-name:x_msonormal;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
p.xmsochpdefault, li.xmsochpdefault, div.xmsochpdefault
{mso-style-name:x_msochpdefault;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.xmsohyperlink
{mso-style-name:x_msohyperlink;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.xmsohyperlinkfollowed
{mso-style-name:x_msohyperlinkfollowed;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.xe-mailstijl17
{mso-style-name:x_e-mailstijl17;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body bgcolor="white" lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Isn’t SWAG just another name for hypothesis, the basis of the scientific method?
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Crispin Pemberton-Pigott<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, February 10, 2015 3:08 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Stoves] Fly ash cement and of levels of radioactivity?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Alright, Alright, Alright G! Go for it.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Do not see through the eyes of another nor hear through another's ears. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I come from the age when there were only three methods of sharing information quickly: <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Telegram<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Telephone<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Tell a woman<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">That is what we learned, anyway. Turns out men also talk a lot.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">When I was 7 my class teacher had us do what in the US is called Chinese Whispers but which we called something completely different. It involved the
first student being told a phrase by the teacher and that student whispering it into the ear of the second, the second whispering it into the ear of the third and so on. Maybe this audience will recognise the game. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">The final content of the message went from a recognisable popular phrase to 'Mummy' by the time it got to the end of the line.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">These days we have the wonderful WWWeb and it is the most effective channel for whispers ever devised. It also places at one's disposal for the first
(for most people) the vast literature of great libraries. The only requirement to be able to use it effectively are a good memory and the ability to think. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">The combination of bias in the media, economic opportunism, easy access, poor memories and untrained minds provides the most extraordinary opportunity
to make money or have 'influence' over those who have little capacity for critical thought. We used to call it 'primary school' but now it is called 'social media' I think. Much more powerful. I blame it (perhaps incorrectly - must check) for people knowing
more about the Kardashian's lipstick colour than the difference between 'accuracy' and 'precision'. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I am not have merely an "</span><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">iconoclastic perspective on many environmental phenomena".
I have an iconoclastic perspective on my own existence! Being naturally sceptical requires thinking outside the box in order to examine the whole box, as far as one is able. Science innovation comes from outside the box. Stove innovation comes from outside
the box. </span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Stove testing innovation comes from thinking outside the power station testing box, for example.
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">There are so many wonderful urban legends that there are websites devoted to them. Step on a crack, break your mother's back. There are canals on Mars.
Genes cannot jump from one chromosome to another. A 'learned trait' cannot be passed on genetically to your children. Continents cannot move. Vinegar will protect you from SARS. </span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">The history of science is the history of the debunking of science, basically. It is not the in-filling of gaps. All gaps are pre-filled with guesses from
someone. Have you heard of a Wild-Assed Guess? (WAG) there are SWAGs too, which is a Scientific Wild-Assed Guess. If you have ever lived in a 'primitive culture' (according to your own cultural bias) you will have encountered WAGs about 'how things work'.
Trying to correct one WAG with a 'fact' or SWAG means displacing an existing truth, not filling in a gap in the knowledge base. </span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">In terms of stove development (nominally the purpose of this discussion group) there is in play at the moment one of the greatest SWAG games ever on
the subject of combustion which is the development of TLUD stoves. </span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Don't get me wrong. There is nothing wrong with it, and it is a lot of fun, and it is leading somewhere, but it is what it is. Not since the period 1680-1750
has there been so much raw experimentation on a novel thought applied to burning things. In the early 1700's it was the application of the concept of downdraft combustion to burning coal (an upsidedown TLUD) that ultimately led to the Franklin Stove as it's
most popular and enduring implementation. It still hasn't caught on in the Masonry Heater movement 250 years later which is not to our credit. At some point the small gasifier movement will settle on a commercially viable approach people are willing to pay
for from their own pocket. That's good. Hang in there. </span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I have to end this message sometime so I will jump to the topic-du-jour which is testing stoves and test protocols and how we can tell if 'my stove is
better'. That is something everyone wants to know. </span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Stove testing protocols are replete with examples of SWAGs. Sometimes there is a recognisable history behind them and sometimes not. Fundamentally the
cause of most conceptual errors are caused by the difference between testing something operating at full power under constant conditions (a power station) and 'rating' the performance of a stove that starts, runs and stops while burning an inhomogeneous solid
fuel. The methods of the former are incompatible with the realities of the latter. You get a number, which looks sciency and all, but it carries little to no information. </span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">It is an urban legend is that a number automatically contains information. Another way of saying it is that all numerical values have real value. In
fact all numbers represent things and somethings the thing it represents is a mistake or misunderstanding, not information. </span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Let me make this very topical. One of the biggest mistakes in stove testing is the concept that 'simmering' has a 'thermal efficiency'. This is flawed
from the get-go as any thermo engineer could immediately tell you because simmering is a task that does not require a change in total energy content (enthalpy). </span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">It was written OUT of stove tests by the Eindhoven Group by 1982 because they were PhD engineers teaching in University (Profs KK Prasad and P Verhaart).
It was reintroduced in 1985 in the VITA WBT over the objections of the Eindhoven Group. It is still there. </span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">It was criticised by Rani et al in 1991 and indirectly by Aprovecho and Berkeley in 2003. It was again included in WBT3.x. It was heartily criticised
by me in 2007 and repeated in WBT4.8 over my objections, and incorporated into the IWA, again over my written objections in 2011 and my loud mouth in 2012. It was criticised in a Journal article by Yixiang Zhang et al in 2014. No one even published an article
supporting it, it is 'just there'. </span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">It is still contained in WBT4.2.3, the AWBT, the EPTP, and other variations originating from the West. It was used as recently as a few weeks ago on this
list to declare the performance of stove A being the best of a bunch when rated using this concept. </span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">It is not that I AM RIGHT!! It is that THIS CONCEPT IS WRONG!! And we have to debunk it.
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Urban legends have faithful followers and they will shoot the messenger just like anyone else.
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">It is not outwardly included in the Indian, Chinese or European 'national' testing methods. It is not used in Mongolia, South Africa or Indonesia in
their stove projects or regulations (not that I know of anyway). I very much doubt the Russians would allow it to creep into their methods as their theoretical foundations are usually excellent though we still can find mistakes. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Part of my paid work is to remove misconceptions from test methods which always means displacing existing gap-fillers, previously viewed as 'information'.
Sometimes these gaps are hard to spot. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Yixiang Zhang and David Beritault and James Robinson have all spotted gaps in my own SeTAR HTP methodology and I found one last year in the Chinese
National Test method. India's test has several. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">What to do? Continuous review by other sets of eyes seems to be the only way to make solid progress. That way the urban legends eventually die off.
Some messengers will get shot, some defenders of their personal Alamo will go down in glory, some Napoleon's will unexpectedly meet their Waterloo. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
"...mercury emissions are so prevalent that even the most pristine Scottish stream has Mercury contaminated salmon."<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">If salmon had no mercury at all in them their brains would not work properly and they would get lost and never find their way home to be caught in the
first place. All life evolved on earth in an environment with low levels of mercury and radiation. And a Lot Of Other Things. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Regards <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Crispin in rain-soaked Jakarta (450mm since Sunday)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>