<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Today one of my FB friends posted something to the effect that
ant-arctic ice levels and ocean coverage has reached unprecedented
levels. But no coverage by the media.<br>
<br>
I have little hope that Larson will ever actually answer a post
rather than just blathering, but I have almost quit following the
lists completely because of his ilk. <br>
<br>
i've been listening to my friends at the airport from the border
police for weeks now complaining about that they don't have staff to
deal with what's going on on the border with the "asylum seekers".
They've already reduced border police airport by 1/3 to help out,
but that's not enough and we can't shut down the whole country to
deal with refugees -- or can we? It may eventually have just that
effect. But I'm just a negative islamophobe ;-)<br>
<br>
there is a non-arithmetic change towards not-good in the
obama(nation). my kids are actually afraid to go there because of
the TSA stuff at present and at the same time they're wondering how
to defend ourselves against muslim attackers without firearms. it's
become an even more crazy world.<br>
<br>
peace,<br>
ron<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 21.09.2015 17:38, Crispin
Pemberton-Pigott wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:COL401-EAS306748B9F92436E0F2C6D7CB1460@phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri,
'Slate Pro', sans-serif, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);
text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Well
said, of course. He is a bully in the bully pulpit, that shaky
edifice wobbling on a stack of self-reviewed self-serving
agit-prop. </div>
<div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri,
'Slate Pro', sans-serif, 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, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);
text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">I
have been driving my wife to the eye clinic so was able to think
of a response. I didn't read his earlier messages because they
are predictable. I opened the one this morning accidentally. </div>
<div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri,
'Slate Pro', sans-serif, 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, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);
text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">I
had a feeling for the first time this morning that the huge
urgent rush to get an ISO draft standard in place by the second
week of November is related to the climate confab in Paris and
some pending announcement from Hilary Clinton that will bolster
her standing amongst women or some such. There is tremendous
pressure to write something agreeable. It has given me space to
bring some real science to the standard. The Chinese and some of
the Indians are well ahead of the US teams in terms of
conceptual understanding. Very interesting to watch. The others
countries don't have a political agenda. Most consider biomass
stoves of minor importance. </div>
<div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri,
'Slate Pro', sans-serif, 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, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);
text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Your
message to Ron hits all the relevant nerves. It is interesting
how similar the memes and attitudes are in stoves and climate.
The EPA is the common element. It is a 'remarkable'
organisation. </div>
<div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri,
'Slate Pro', sans-serif, 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, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);
text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Best
wishes</div>
<div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri,
'Slate Pro', sans-serif, 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, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);
text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Crispin
</div>
<div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri,
'Slate Pro', sans-serif, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);
text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><br>
</div>
<div style="font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro',
sans-serif, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align:
initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">BBM 'Crispin'</div>
<table style="background-color:white;border-spacing:0px;"
width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" style="font-size: initial; text-align:
initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<div style="border-style: solid none none;
border-top-color: rgb(181, 196, 223); border-top-width:
1pt; padding: 3pt 0in 0in; font-family: Tahoma, 'BB
Alpha Sans', 'Slate Pro'; font-size: 10pt;">
<div><b>From: </b>Ronald Hongsermeier</div>
<div><b>Sent: </b>Monday, September 21, 2015 11:18</div>
<div><b>To: </b>Discussion of biomass cooking stoves</div>
<div><b>Reply To: </b>Discussion of biomass cooking
stoves</div>
<div><b>Subject: </b>Re: [Stoves] Clean coal burning
stoves Re: History of clean Chinese stove development.</div>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<div id="_originalContent" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255,
255);">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
On the contrary, Mr. Larson, your higher than thou, mightier
than thou attitude is quite often lacking in consideration of
the ultimate assumptions of your argumentation. Either coal, gas
and oil are or are not the products of biomass. Which is it?<br>
<br>
You seem to assume the latter.<br>
<br>
I'm quite sorry to "waste your time" but you spend a _lot_ of
time with what appears to me to be non-technical, non-scientific
polit-babble. And I find your tone condescending and
supremacist. Legislating that no one gets to use coal, oil and
gas will insure that a lot of people will be bypassed by
development until someday, when wind/solar renewables finally
get to the end of the economic chain (i.e., the poorest of the
poor). Taking advantage of already concentrated energy has been
the driving force for development in the world. Please take into
consideration the effects of what your proposals entail.<br>
<br>
hornet out.<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 21.09.2015 14:43, Ronal W.
Larson wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:477A9DF8-52F0-4F53-A81C-D4330417DD98@comcast.net"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
Ronald:
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>This
(a time-wasting message) is a good example of why I wrote my
note - reminding folks about the list topic - “discussion of
biomass (stoves)”.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Ron </div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
<div>
<div>On Sep 21, 2015, at 6:18 AM, Ronald Hongsermeier
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:rwhongser@web.de">rwhongser@web.de</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> Mr. Larson,<br>
evidently you agree with cold-war era soviet
scientists that coal and oil and natural gas all
come from non-biological chemical origins?<br>
<br>
Ronald von Schwarzkohlebayern<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 16.09.2015 21:40,
Ronal W. Larson wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:F69E566B-9801-4991-B978-D182764B0031@comcast.net"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type"
content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div>Paul and list:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>1.
I mostly agree with everything you say below.
But mostly for reasons of wanting to save our
valuable time, I now ask that this list stop
talking about coal stoves. Biomass only stoves
would be in accordance with the way we started
up almost 20 years ago (as the first list
coordinator, I think I wrote that sentence -
which I gave a few days ago). It is worse than
that we are wasting people’s time, with only one
person ever bringing up coal and coal stove
topics. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>2.
There was a concluding sentence in a Crispin
message this AM whose origin is masked by
Crispin that I find more offensive that the
generally offensive material above it. If
Crispin didn’t write these four pro-coal
paragraphs and this sentence, </div>
<div>
<div class="WordSection1" style="page:
WordSection1;">
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; white-space: pre;"> </span><font
face="Calibri, sans-serif"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"> </span><i><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"> </span><span
style="font-size: 15px;">“</span><span
style="font-size: 11pt;">Forty years
of failure - improved </span></i><i><span
style="font-size: 15px;">wood stoves</span><span
style="font-size: 11pt;">. Forty more
years? Our daughters deserve better.</span></i><span
style="font-size: 15px;"><i>”</i></span></font></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<div>we deserve to know who did. And we can
get rid of such trash with the
understanding that offenders will have all
their material reviewed before going out.
Policing is not difficult.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>3. .
What is worse that we get totally erroneous
denier-based non-stove pro-coal arguments - that
too many list members are apt to believe. I am
particularly incensed by Crispin’s ludicrous
statement from this AM:</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span><i
style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125); font-family:
Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 15px;">The
feeling these days is that for a doubling of
CO2 the global temperature will rise about 0.6
to 0.9 degrees.</i></div>
<div>A scientific rebuttal by a full time topic
expert is at <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.skepticalscience.com/challenges-constraining-climate-sensitivity.html">http://www.skepticalscience.com/challenges-constraining-climate-sensitivity.html</a> ,
showing Crispin is off by a factor of about 5.
I’m sure Crispin strongly believes that the
world’s largest ever scientific study (IPCC’s
AR5) is dead wrong. So wrong he needn’t give a
cite for the view from his own “Science” circle.
I find this type of error so often I basically
now disbelieve Crispin. This include his
assertion that char produced in char-making
stoves should receive no credit unless burned in
that stove. How many dozens of list hours have
been wasted on that topic - which I believe
comes from a denier position?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>4.
There are plenty of options available. If
Crispin started a coal-stove list, I would
attempt to join. I presume there should be some
existing list that can serve the claimed need.
I reject the idea that Crispin wrote today: “<i
style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125); font-family:
Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">Change
the purpose of the list so that the needs of
hundreds of millions of ordinary people are
not abandoned.</i><font color="#1f497d"
face="Calibri, sans-serif"><span
style="font-size: 15px;"><i>”, </i></span></font>since
I can’t recall any such guidance ever going in
the coal-using direction from this list<font
color="#1f497d">.</font></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;"><font
color="#1f497d"><br>
</font></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;"><font
color="#1f497d"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>5.
Re the other items in your list, see inserts
below </font></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
<div>
<div>On Sep 15, 2015, at 3:22 PM, Paul Anderson
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:psanders@ilstu.edu">psanders@ilstu.edu</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Ron,
(to website)<br>
<br>
You make good points. But the devil is in
the details, or in the realities of our
world.<br>
<br>
1. If the monitors of the Stoves Listserv
want to enforce the definition that we can
only discuss biomass fuels and related
stoves, I will comply. However, until such
a ruling is debated and stated clearly, I
contend that writing and talking about coal
as a cookstove fuel is informative and we
all need to be aware of its pros and cons,
as well as the occasional mentions of LPG
and kerosene (paraffin). See more below.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span><b>RWL1:
I am only concerned about coal - as the
others can be made from biomass. Absoluely we
should debate, but there is an existing rule
already in place - that is being violated.</b></div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> 2. As
much as I agree with you and the EPA on the
issues of climate change and CO2 increases
in the atmosphere (being bad), there are
very very very few of us (off grid, etc,
etc.) in the developed countries who do not
have a positive (bad) CO2 footprint every
day. By sending an email from Illinois, I
use electricity that has some mix of power
that comes from fossil fuels. The EPA will
leave me alone. They should be after the
big fish who emit much CO2.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span><b>[RWL2:
Disagree. We have to move towards 100% RE.
I of course fail also, but we must try. And
Illinois will have to honor the CPP - and you
will be responsible soon for less pollution -
and you should be proud of that fact. And the
costs need not increase.</b><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <br>
3. An impoverished household in Mongolia or
elsewhere that can cook and heat cleanly
(health-wise) with coal is another truly
small fish regarding its CO2 footprint. We
should not be working or advocating against
them having coal-burning stoves that are
CLEAN for their health (CO2 is not
poisonous). That is so, especially while
we affluent folks run around in automobiles
and heat much larger homes to probably
warmer temperatures and also lavish
ourselves with air conditioning, with so
much energy derived from fossil fuels. </div>
</blockquote>
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span><b>[RWL3:
Agree CO2 is not poisonous - but that from
fossil fuels (and 100 ppm already in the
atmosphere) is a pollutant. We can
demonstrate CO2 reductions, and they can/must
help as well. This is what COP21 is all
about - and I believe 193 countries will
be agreeing that we have to do it - painful
though it is. It is worse if we delay. I
have my doubts that the world’s dirtiest city
is going to become acceptable without getting
off coal.</b><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <br>
<br>
4. One household is one small amount of CO2
that could be justified, but would 100,000
households be a different story? Or 10
MILLION households, as could easily be the
case if China turned to using the new
coal-stove design now in use in Mongolia?
That could be a lot of CO2 increase. But
it would be a lot of CO2 if those became LPG
burners. Fuel supply is crucial. We
cannot deny people the opportunity to cook
their meals or warm their homes because
"acceptable renewable" fuels are not
available. Crispin, do you have numbers
(CO2, black carbon, methane, etc.) about the
climate impact of the new coal burners <u>in
comparison with </u>the climate impact of
the old-style coal burners? How much
better (lower climate impact)? Is that
improvement not sufficient justification to
stimulate (financially bolster) the
transition from the old to the new coal
burners? Ron, could that improvement be
the realistic goal, or should the short term
goal be the abolition of all coal burning
stoves?<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span><b>[RWL4:
Just as the Chinese have taken the global
lead in PV, solar hot water, and wind - they
will soon be leading in biochar and from
char-making stoves. Yes the short-term goal
should be abolition of coal-burning stoves.
And the Chinese know they have to do it - and
I congratulate them for their path (which can
include improving their soils at the same
time).</b><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <br>
5. The GACC certainly embraces clean
burning LPG and natural gas, and would like
to have clean-burning kerosene stoves. The
GACC <i><u><b>either</b></u></i> must
condemn those "advanced" fossil fuels and
their stoves <b><u>OR </u></b>embrace coal
with clean-burning coal stoves. To leave
LPG in and exclude coal is hypocrisy that
must be addressed at the GACC Forum in
November. Either all cleanly burned fossil
fuels and their stoves must be acceptable to
the GACC, or no fossil fuels should be in
the GACC discussions and programs. <br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span><b>[RWL5:
There are more choices than you have given.
We know how to make bioliquids. If fossil
carbon had the pollution price it should be
bearing (about $40/tonne CO2 per many
estimates), there would be no question about
folks everywhere planting the trees we need
for both carbon neutrality and carbon
negativity. Big parts of China are already
seeing such a tax. China has planted more
trees than the rest of the world combined.
They are flaring much straw still today.
They are one of the last countries to need to
use coal. Why wouldn’t they want to move away
from coal-burning? Especially as they
have already made commitments (with Obama)
that are pushing other countries. China does
not need coal stoves.</b></div>
<div><b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>I
can understand Kirk Smith arguing for liquid
fuels, but I am sure he would prefer
bioliquids. The difference in cost between
fossil and bio sources is insignificant, even
when you ignore the fossil CO2 damages.</b></div>
<div><b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>As
Dean Still has said today, we can get there.
I know there is a long way to go in improving
char-making cook stoves, with way too little
funding going towards this target. I see some
good work coming along - finally.<br>
</b>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <br>
We know (and are grateful) that leaders in
the GACC and WB and EPA do read the Stoves
Listserv, although they seldom comment.
The comments in #5 above should have some
reply by the end of October so that the
issue will be addressed at the November
Forum, either with or without GACC's
agreement with #5. Fossil fuels with GOOD
stoves are either ALL IN or art ALL OUT. At
the Forum, certainly the World Bank and
other financial backers of the Mongolia
success will be advocating for coal to be
included, along with the attendees from
Mongolia. Other supporters should be
those who work with LPG, natural gas, and
kerosene, otherwise they face opposition to
the continued inclusion of those fuels in
any GACC programs. To exclude them would be
like making them automatic Tier 1 or Tier 0
(bad) stoves and fuels.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>[RWL6:
If GACC et al value carbon as is likely to
come out of Paris, they won’t have to worry
about prioritizing; they will emphasize
renewables. It is time to give up on
outdated, harmful technologies. Many large US
firms put the pollution cost of carbon (such
as the $40 above) - and then use the resulting
savings against that target to do other right
things. Since the EPA is the main
agency behind the CPP (Clean Power Plan) -
clearly anti-coal and pro-gas, they would be
hypocritical to ignore the coal-bio difference
with cook stoves.</b><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <br>
It will be interesting to see who rises to
advocate exclusion of all fossil fuels and
stoves. Being selective of some and not
other fossil fuels is not allowed. All in
or all out!!! Or does climate change
trump family health?<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span><b>[RWL7:
You need to explain this last question. We
can improve both at the same time with the
same stove hardware (and soil health).</b></div>
<div><b><br>
</b></div>
<div><b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>I
have spent the last several days on the news
that a Dutch Court recently told the Dutch
government (after a case lasting many months)
that it had to do a lot better than it was
proposing in response to the EU agreements on
CO2 reductions. They now have been ordered to
reach 25% CO2 reduction by 2020 (and must
appeal within about 10 days). I suggest many
other groups could face similar legal
judgments - with the strong rationale that we
know (per IPCC AR5) that this is the cheapest
approach, with the most beneficial health
impacts. Stoves are in no way exempt from
this consensus science view. By 193 countries
signing off, they have already admitted the
truth behind fossil CO2 damage projections.
Deniers can claim otherwise - but they have
lost this battle.</b></div>
<div><b><br>
</b></div>
<div><b>Ron<br>
</b>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <br>
Paul<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email: <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:psanders@ilstu.edu">psanders@ilstu.edu</a>
Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website: <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.drtlud.com/">www.drtlud.com</a></pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/15/2015
1:33 PM, Ronal W. Larson wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:0FCBCB14-5951-4CAD-BDD6-606E2CF163FA@comcast.net"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type"
content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div>Paul cc list</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Well
- I have to disagree. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Our
EPA has declared that CO2 from all
fossil fuels is a pollutant. That was
held up in the US Supreme Court. Most of
the world agrees that fossil fuel CO2
needs to be eliminated and that is what
COP21 in Paris is about.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span> Per
the latest IPCC documents, we have to
get off all fossil fuels. And so I hope
that GACC will stay away from endorsing
any coal, oil, or natural gas consuming
stove. Those fuels don’t need the help
of this list or GACC. Biomass can
supply all those forms of energy anyway
- in most cases cheaper where biomass
cook stoves are now in use.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" style="widows:
1;"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Additionally
the guiding words for this list
emphasize it is for biomass. [“<span
style="background-color: rgb(255,
255, 255); widows: 1;"><font
face="Verdana, Tahoma, DejaVu
Sans, sans-serif"><span
style="font-size: 12px;
line-height: 18px;"><u><b>Our
site is dedicated to helping
people develop better stoves
for cooking with biomass
fuels in developing
regions.”]</b></u></span></font></span></blockquote>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Ron</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
<div>
<div>On Sep 15, 2015, at 6:01 AM, Paul
Anderson <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:psanders@ilstu.edu">psanders@ilstu.edu</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"
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;">Dear
ALL,
(post to<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://drtlud.com/"
style="color: purple;
text-decoration: underline;">drtlud.com</a><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>website)<br>
<br>
EVERYONE should carefully read
Crispin's message (below). I cannot
substantiate his comments about
specific stoves, and we will hope
that Prof. Lloyd will send
references about the Scotch Method.<br>
<br>
Otherwise, I am IN TOTAL AGREEMENT
WITH CRISPIN. Read each line, soak
it in. <span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<br>
Concerning the stoves in Mongolia,
of course I am delighted that:
<blockquote type="cite"><span>all
but one of them is a TLUD.</span></blockquote>
But that is not the issue. The
issue is that low grade coal is able
to be burned cleanly in sufficiently
inexpensive cookstoves for the
climate and culture. Note that
those Mongolian stoves have an
important function for household
heating, helping to justify the
higher costs of stoves with heavier
metal. The probable financial
assistance ("subsidy" to the
purchaser) can be justified in the
clean air accomplishments that
benefit not just the impoverished
people, but also all of the wealthy
who want clean air both locally and
internationally (global air quality
issues are important). <span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<br>
The Mongolian stoves are not being
proclaimed as being for tropical
areas where the stove constructions
and costs need to be different.<br>
<br>
About coal as fuel for stoves and
home heaters: Coal needs to be
included in the fuels for cookstoves
WHEN COUPLED WITH CLEAN-BURNING
STOVES. When that is the case, the
only major "negative characteristic"
is that coal is a fossil fuel (being
carbon positive to the atmosphere).
Well, that also applies to LPG
!!!! which is a very highly
regarded fuel for clean cookstoves.
Double standards are not
acceptable. This issue needs to be
addressed!!! <span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<br>
And it should be addressed at least
by the time of the GACC Forum in
Ghana on 10 -13 Nov where a
resolution or statement or
declaration (or whatever groups do)
could be officially made about the
acceptability of coal as a cookstove
fuel WHEN USED IN CLEAN-BURNING
STOVES.<br>
<br>
None of the above is against
fan-assisted stoves or natural draft
TLUDs. Instead, the effort is to
get coal and the<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><b><u>appropriate</u></b>coal-burning
stoves added to the list of
contributing solutions to the
world's cookstove problems.<br>
<br>
Comments please to the Stoves
Listserv.<br>
<br>
Paul<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Courier New';">Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email: <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:psanders@ilstu.edu" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;">psanders@ilstu.edu</a>
Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website: <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.drtlud.com/" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;">www.drtlud.com</a></pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On
9/14/2015 10:45 PM, Crispin
Pemberton-Pigott wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:COL401-EAS341D5127111A321E8227536B15C0@phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1"
style="page: WordSection1;">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>Dear Paul<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm
0.0001pt; line-height: normal;
font-size: 11pt; font-family:
Calibri, sans-serif;"><span>That
linked document has this to
say: “</span><span
style="font-size: 11.5pt;
font-family: Arial,
sans-serif; color:
windowtext;">For biomass
cooking, pending further
evidence from the field,
significant health benefits
are possible only with the
highest quality fan gasifier
stoves…”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm
0.0001pt; line-height: normal;
font-size: 11pt; font-family:
Calibri, sans-serif;"><span
style="font-size: 11.5pt;
font-family: Arial,
sans-serif; color:
windowtext;"> </span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm
0.0001pt; line-height: normal;
font-size: 11pt; font-family:
Calibri, sans-serif;"><span>I
don’t know who invented that
idea – it is traceable to
Kirk Smith (Bangkok, Nov
2010) but I think the
concept that ‘the only
really clean stoves are fan
assisted gasifiers’ is older
than that. Maybe it emerged
from Berkeley. It doesn’t
matter.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm
0.0001pt; line-height: normal;
font-size: 11pt; font-family:
Calibri, sans-serif;"><span
style="font-size: 11.5pt;
font-family: Arial,
sans-serif; color:
windowtext;"> </span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>It is not
true.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>Is that
clear enough? How else can
we say it? It is not true
that the only really clean
stoves are fan assisted
gasifiers. This caution is
also contained in the
statement, “It is not true
that the only really clean
stoves are fan assisted or
ND TLUD pyrolysers.”<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>The most
expensive externally funded
improved stove replacement
programme in the world is
the Mongolian urban ger
stove programme, funded by
the US-based MCC through the
MCA-Mongolia account, the
WB, the Asian Development
Bank and the City Government
of Ulaanbaatar. There are a
large number of additional
players including Xaas Bank,
carbon trading funders and
national Ministries.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>Assiduously
examining a large number of
stove options, and creating
an advanced testing
laboratory on a shoe string,
incorporating a test method
that predicts reasonably the
field performance (field
testing proved to be nearly
impossible, even for LBNL,
which tried hard) a set of
stoves that are well over
90% cleaner than the
baseline stoves (several
>98%) was selected for
distribution. Not one of
them is fan assisted and not
one of them is a pyrolyser
save in the sense that all
coal stoves are pyrolysers.
Certainly it is true that
all solid fuel stoves are
gasifiers. Quibbling will
not change the fact flames
burn gas.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>A lot of
people worked hard to bring
this together and pull off
the biggest clean-up of a
major city’s air ever
accomplished without
changing the fuel – because
the fuel was<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i>never<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></i>the problem. It is an
excellent fuel and burns so
cleanly the stove comparison
chart would have to create
two more tiers to fairly
accommodate them. The fact
that this achievement is
still ignored continues to
stain the ICS community. The
reason for this is obvious:
coal is supposed to be the
demon fuel that cannot be
burned cleanly. Millions of
people are going to burn
coal for a long time to come
– deal with it. Burn it
properly.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>These
super-clean stoves originate
from Turkey, China and
Mongolia. The producers pay
no attention to anything
going on in the “TLUD
world”, even though all but
one of them is a TLUD. It
is unfortunate that the
fictions that “solid fuels
cannot be burned cleanly”,
and “only fans work”, and
“coal cannot be burned
cleanly” because it contains
“pollution” are repeated by
those who should know their
field better. Making these
statements makes the speaker
look like a disconnected
amateur. Modern Austrian
fireplaces are cleaner than
most very improved stoves
and they are made of brick
for heaven’s sake. They are
not even ‘stoves’. The
Russians are building ‘bell’
heat exchangers that are
brilliant.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>The IC
stove community has to start
living in the present.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>Here is a
test of the laboratory air
at the SEET lab and the
emissions of a cross draft
stove (currently reproduced
exactly by a small local
welding shop in
Ulaanbaatar):<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>[[ Image
deleted from copy of
message.]]<br>
</span><span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>These two
Dusttraks were compared with
each other before this photo
was taken. They agreed
within 2 micrograms at a
concentration of more than
400. The one on the left is
brand new, brought by LBNL
(Berkeley) measuring the
ambient air (195<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span>µ</span><span>g/m<sup>3</sup>)
and the one on the right is
from SEET Lab sampling
directly from the chimney (0</span><span><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>µ</span><span>g/m<sup>3</sup>).<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i>That<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></i>is
a clean stove.<i><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></i>The
dirty air going into the
stove is being cleaned by
the fire, while burning wet
lignite: 50% volatiles (AD)
and 26% moisture.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>It is high
time to admit that coal and
indeed wood can be burned by
a number of methods
extremely well. No fuel has
a monopoly on cleanliness.
The concept of a ‘dirty
fuel’ is archaic and was
never correct. It was always
a misconception.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>Equally
incorrect is the idea that
ethanol, for example, is a
‘clean fuel’. I have just
seen a test of an ethanol
stove that doesn’t come
close to meeting the South
African kerosene stove test
requirement at high power or
low. This is quite common.
Most ethanol stoves are not
very clean when it comes to
CO. They literally can’t
hold a candle to the stoves
sold in Ulaanbaatar that
burn lignite. Why? Bad
combustion.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>What’s
next? China of course. And
India. Why should their
stove programmes be held
back by errant
preconceptions originating
within the ‘clean air’ and
‘clean stove’ communities?
If the clean air and clean
stove communities can’t keep
up with reality, others will
step in to lead. Projects
are not going to be willing
to spend $50m on junk
science claims. Or $500m.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>Paul, you
are correct to ask for
references. The method of
burning coal “TLUD” is
called the ‘Scotch Method’
in South African and goes
back over a century. I
believe Prof Lloyd has some
sources for that because he
was thinking about the
problem in the mid-70’s.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>Regards to
all<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span>Crispin<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;
line-height: 15px; font-size:
11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif;"><span> </span><br
class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<pre style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Courier New';"><o:p> </o:p></pre>
<pre style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Courier New';">In case you have not seen this, micro-gasifiers have received some significant recognition (ESMAP + GACC 2015 publication, page 90). <o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Courier New';"><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/21878/96499.pdf" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;">https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/21878/96499.pdf</a> <o:p></o:p></pre>
<blockquote style="margin-top:
5pt; margin-bottom: 5pt;">
<pre style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Courier New'; line-height: 13px;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 15px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" lang="EN-US"> “<b>The most exciting technology trend in the biomass cookstove sector is<o:p></o:p></b></span></pre>
<pre style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Courier New'; line-height: 13px;"><b><span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 15px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" lang="EN-US">the growing range of forced draft and natural draft gasifier stoves</span></b><span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 15px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" lang="EN-US">. These stoves have shown the greatest<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Courier New'; line-height: 13px;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 15px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" lang="EN-US">potential to improve health and environmental outcomes, at least under<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Courier New';"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" lang="EN-US">laboratory conditions.” (ESMAP 2015, p. 90). </span><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Courier New';"><o:p> </o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset
class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Courier New';" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;">stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org</a>
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;">http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Stoves mailing list<br>
<br>
to Send a Message to the list, use
the email address<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org"
style="color: purple;
text-decoration: underline;">stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List
Settings use the web page<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org"
style="color: purple;
text-decoration: underline;">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves,
News and Information see our web
site:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/"
style="color: purple;
text-decoration: underline;">http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/</a><br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org">stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org</a>
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/">http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Stoves mailing list<br>
<br>
to Send a Message to the list, use the email
address<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org">stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings
use the web page<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and
Information see our web site:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/">http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org">stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org</a>
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/">http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Stoves mailing list<br>
<br>
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org">stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the
web page<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information
see our web site:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/">http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org">stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org</a>
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/">http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<!--end of _originalContent --></div>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org">stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org</a>
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/">http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>