<html><head></head><body style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: initial;"> <div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Dear Frank</div><div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><br></div><div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">You catch on fast and you are asking the right questions.</div><div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="line-height: initial; font-size: initial; text-align: initial;"><br></span></div><div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="line-height: initial; font-size: initial; text-align: initial;">>But the energy used is a percent of the biomass used (so the biomass can be calculated) and the char left has no benefit to the task that was done. Perhaps useful for a later task (stove selling point) - but just energy wasted as far as this first task.</span></div><div id="_originalContent" style=""><div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div lang="EN-CA" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 18px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1;"><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><br></span></div><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">The energy used is a % of the biomass used, but suppose you are testing a pellet stoves that always goes out when there is 10% of the pellets left, and those pellets are useless in the next burn. Tracking the energy used is not going to predict the fuel consumption. This is not a small error. What happens to remaining fuel, even perfectly burnable sticks remaining, is not always predictable. In Indonesia users of a traditional clay two pot stove often toss all remaining fuel into the fire and place wet wood over the stove to dry it out for tomorrow. </span></div><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><br></span></div><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">How will you evaluate the fuel consumption and the energy consumption? That behaviour increases the heat content of tomorrow's fuel!</span></div><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br></div></div></div></blockquote>>These 13 labs that have shown they can start the fire, keep the stove going and do a simple task as well as the other labs and get the same results (biomass and time per task), is good to go. They can now be provided a stove to test and the fuel (or fuel requirements) to be used and they complete a task recording biomass and time needed. The biomass and time needed are comparable to other labs conducting the same test on the same stove. The emissions can be tested at the same time if the lab has proven they have the equipment and can use it properly. </div><div><br></div><div>That is a good test of the capability of the lab. </div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div lang="EN-CA" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 18px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1;"><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br></div></div></div></blockquote>>The same question can be applied to emissions. I suspect the emissions released will be different depending on the pot shape and contents (water filled or hot plate) it is heating. Different in both chemistry and particulates. (?) </div><div><br></div><div>That can be true especially for stoves that are very sensitive such as methanol and ethanol. I have seen the CO triple simply by changing the pot size. You must know the operating conditions. </div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div lang="EN-CA" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1;"><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;"><span><font face="Times New Roman, serif">>></font></span><span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">Any qualified lab (as you describe) should be able to perform the same test cycle with the same fuel and pot (etc) and get a similar result. That</span><font face="Times New Roman, serif" size="3"> </font><i style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">in no way</i><font face="Times New Roman, serif" size="3"> </font><span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">means that all stoves should be tested using the same cycle, pot and fuel. You could</span><font face="Times New Roman, serif" size="3"> </font><i style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">do it</i><font face="Times New Roman, serif" size="3"> </font><span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">but the result would not be useful.</span></div><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;"></div></div></div></blockquote><div>>Agree Agree - -but </div><div>How can a person with stove designed in Minnesota have their stove tested for use in Lusaka? and compared to others marketing stoves there? </div><div><br></div><div>They have to look up the Lusaka cooking cycles in an index. The role of the social scientists is to correctly report the cooking cycles and the preferred heat flow rates of a target population. I suspect that the number of cooking cycles will not be all that large. Suppose it was 50 to 100. That is not difficult to keep on file. </div><div><br></div><div>Then you need the fuel specs. </div><div><br></div><div>>...and then want to sell stoves in Koluha, India? Traveling to different countries and testing with locals and their fuels will get a little expensive! and there may be a lot of high quality stoves are not in the running because of cost and requirements. : ( So we get standards for ‘like fuels’ to be used in testing. And define the task to select the ‘cooking utinsal’ that is to be used on site. </div><div><br></div><div>You do not have to travel to India to run a relevant test. You have to know what they do there. Thus a producer can run a stove through ten different cooking cycles in their own lab to see how it will perform in different cultures. Most stoves perform better at some tasks than others. Obviously it will get a better rating doing things it was designed for. </div><div><br></div><div>We have to choose metrics that will report fairly for all burn cycles. I it is not reasonably to compare all stoves on 'their best performance' nor doing one standard thing because neither has any meaning for a particular place and all stoves get used in a particular place. </div><div><br></div><div>The best we can do is to create a cooking cycle that represents 'average use' and that can be done scientifically. Once characterised, and validated, the test remains on the books with a number. </div><div><br></div><div>Stove promoters then look up the cycles that represent reasonably the cooking cycles in their target area. They ask for stoves to be submitted that have been tested using that cycle or cycles. Manufacturers can provide their own claims or independent lab results. Promoters then get what they are paying for. </div><div><br></div><div>Anthropological information is very valuable in these assessments because it tells the producer what consumers want and why they might reject a new stove. Two big complaints are being underpowered and slow to ignite. </div><div><br></div><div>Regards </div><div>Crispin </div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div><br><!--end of _originalContent --></div></body></html>