<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=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@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;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:AdvTT5235d5a9;}
@font-face
{font-family:AdvTT5235d5a9+fb;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;}
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:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1515536142;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:1501481772 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:1954246592;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-692138914 1590208954 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-start-at:0;
mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:-;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@list l1:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l1:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l1:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l1:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></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-CA link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Stovers<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>For the record I would like to point out that there is a fundamental disagreement about what is supposed to be contained in WG2- Part 2 and while it appeared to me to have been resolved through discussion in January, the descriptions below are not aligned with that discussion. That can go to the relevant group offline.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>I see no advantage for the stove community to take the discussions about the paper in question, the testing in China and the claims made for exceeding the WHO IAQG guidelines. That this matter and several others that have been causing a lot of problems for stove projects on the ground is not ‘news’, and in the past, taking them offline has failed to resolve them.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>They include but are not limited to:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>The scientific validity of some performance metrics<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>The correctness of some of the interim calculations<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>The appropriateness of some metrics as performance rating criteria<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>The use of stove performance numbers to underwrite an air quality indicator<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>The use of a single or three box model to model exposure based on a stove test<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>The appropriateness of the test cycle chosen to represent product performance<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>The worthiness of arbitrary test cycle results for stove rating and selection<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>The assumption that all PM2.5 particles have the same toxicity<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>When it comes to product regulation at the national level, there is an inherent expectation that the test and rating method will predict performance so the government regulator knows if a product is acceptable for public use or good enough to meet policy objectives. Obviously if a test cannot predict what the product does, or will do, with reasonable confidence, that test or rating system is not skilled enough to use as a national standard.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Many countries already have stove performance standards. In order to have an ISO standard replace a national standard, it will have to at least as good a job because it will displace it. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Stove tests (which are models of future average performance) and exposure models (which are models of future, average exposure to a stove in kitchens) can be very helpful. The history of the WBT lab test in particular, even from its authors and supporters, is that it does not predict performance in use. The principles underlying its construction are present in all tests that attempt to have a ‘standard’ test cycle for the reason of ‘comparing them all on an equal basis’. Such a comparison is pointless. Stoves are like cars – there is no point in testing all cars on a single common cycle in order to ‘rate them against each other’ with a common drive cycle when there are so many different cars with different markets and functions and user requirements. No one accepts that. Why should the regulators of stoves?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>We cannot coast into the future on the coattails of past heroic efforts, however well-intentioned.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Crispin<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>Paul,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>Thanks for forwarding Kirk Smith’s</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'> email with the abstract on a “</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>Comparison of International and Chinese water boiling test protocols.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>However, given your comment “<i>It seems that some entities in the international leadership of clean cookstoves might be pushing for one test without sufficient attention to alternative testing methods,</i>” I want to remind you, and inform others on the distribution lists, about two things:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2'><![if !supportLists]><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>1.<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span></span><![endif]><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>how the ISO technical committee (TC285) working to develop voluntary international standards operates; and<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2'><![if !supportLists]><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>2.<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span></span><![endif]><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>how Working Group #2 – which is charged with developing laboratory testing methods, is moving forward.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>ISO Technical Committee 285 (TC285) currently has 28 countries participating, and 14 observing, with 10 international organization participating as well. Here in the US, many of our colleagues are engaged in the activities of TC285. We have 99 people from 63 organizations participating in the US Technical Advisory Group – with 33 experts participating in the four TC285 working groups. All this is to say – <i>the some entities</i></span><i><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'> </span></i><i><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>in the international leadership of clean cookstoves</span></i><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'> – <u>is us</u>. It is your colleagues in the US and around the world – we are the international leadership developing testing methods – it is not just one person or one organization who is the international leader. In fact, the chairperson of TC 285, the chairs of the national committees, and the conveners and project leaders of all the working groups, are responsible for staying neutral and not pushing a specific idea. In addition, these leaders are responsible for ensuring everyone has an opportunity to be heard and to facilitate a constructive discussion to bring different perspectives together.</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'> Also, it is important to note </span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>that each country gets one vote. So all the people on the USTAG have merge our perspectives into one, and that the USTAG’s vote is just one vote out of 28.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>In addition to keeping all participants in the USTAG informed and engaged, EPA and Winrock, with the support of the Global Alliance and the participation of TC285 leaders from Germany, Nepal, South Africa, and Uganda, have worked to keep all interested parties from around the world informed and engaged on TC285 activities, hosting a webinar on December 14<sup>th</sup> to update folks on the progress at the TC285 meeting in Accra that preceded the Forum. That webinar can be found at <a href="http://www.pciaonline.org/webinars">http://www.pciaonline.org/webinars</a> Additionally, you will recall that there was a session at the January ETHOS Conference where we had representatives from each of the working groups report on their progress to date and upcoming plans<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>Regarding developing laboratory testing methods, Working Group 2 is moving forward on two tracks: <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo4'><![if !supportLists]><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>-<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span></span><![endif]><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>Part I is a “Standard [laboratory] test sequence for emissions and performance, safety, and durability” which has reached the committee draft stage. In fact the voting on the committee draft has just concluded and the working group will soon be meeting to review 68 pages of comments – showing how engaged the international community is in developing this test sequence. The purpose of Part I is to provide a standard test sequence to establish international comparability in measurements of cookstove emissions and efficiency.</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'> T</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>here is a lot of flexibility within the standard test sequence as well – an option to test at just one or two power levels (versus all three), a plancha option, fuels, pots, etc. So that the standard test sequence still wouldn’t have everyone doing the exact same thing.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo4'><![if !supportLists]><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>-<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span></span><![endif]><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>Part II is a “Contextual [laboratory] test sequence” which will be used for comparability within particular demographic settings. The idea is to attempt to replicate local field conditions, as much as practical, in the lab. Part II is in the early draft stage. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>If you, or anyone copied on this email would like to be engaged in developing testing methods, I strongly encourage you to contact your country’s standards development agency. In the US that is the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the contact is Rachel Hawthorne, and she can be reached at</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'> </span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><a href="mailto:rhawthorne@ansi.org">rhawthorne@ansi.org</a> Folks outside the US can also contact Rachel and she can direct you the standards development agency in your country. If anyone has questions about TC285 generally or about the USTAG, please contact me at <a href="mailto:mitchell.john@epa.gov">mitchell.john@epa.gov</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>All the best,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>John<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='color:windowtext'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US style='color:windowtext'> stove-bounces@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto:stove-bounces@lists.berkeley.edu] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Paul Anderson<br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, March 17, 2016 9:22 PM<br><b>To:</b> stove@lists.berkeley.edu; Stoves and biofuels network <Stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [stove] Comparison of stove testing procedures<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Stovers,<br><br>Below is the abstract of a significant comparative study done in China. We thank Kirk Smith and his Stove list (different from StoveS) for the information.<br><br>Spoiler alert: Here is the punch line from the abstract: </span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>Statistically significant differences</span><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>between the two [China and Internatonal WBT] protocols indicate the need for further efforts in emission tests and methodology development</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>before the release of a well-accepted international testing protocol.</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><br>Yes. Should we be surprised. It seems that some entities in the international leadership of clean cookstoves might be pushing for one test without sufficient attention to alternative testing methods.<br><br>Note (in abstract) that: <o:p></o:p></span></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>With longer burning duration and higher</span><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>power, the Chinese WBT had statistically higher efficiencies, gas temperature, and lower pollutant emissions</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span lang=EN-US><br>Sure!!! Change the duration and power, expect different test results!!! <br><br>What is clear to me is that there should never be only one set of tests. People around the world have very different ways of cooking. High power in China, plancha stoves in Central America, two-arm cooking of thick foods in parts of Africa, long-simmering bean-meals vs. quick boil of rice meals, and on and on. The people we are trying to serve want solutions that are appropriate for their circumstances. <br><br>Observation: There seems to be a slow-down in the seeking of stove testing at the major testing centers that have equipment. I can be shown to be incorrect if any testing centers would give us some statistics of numbers and types of tests that are being requested.<br><br>Of course I like the importance of emissions testing because the TLUDs and other micro-gasifiers consistently give superior results. But most funding in the past has gone to less-qualified stoves. <br><br>Paul<o:p></o:p></span></p><pre><span lang=EN-US>Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Email: <a href="mailto:psanders@ilstu.edu">psanders@ilstu.edu</a><o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Website: <a href="http://www.drtlud.com">www.drtlud.com</a><o:p></o:p></span></pre><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>On 3/17/2016 1:08 PM, Kirk R. Smith wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>Can be downloaded from the website below/k</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:AdvTT5235d5a9'> </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:AdvTT5235d5a9'>Ef</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:AdvTT5235d5a9+fb'>fi</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:AdvTT5235d5a9'>ciencies and pollutant emissions from forced-draft biomass-pellet semi-gasi</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:AdvTT5235d5a9+fb'>fi</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:AdvTT5235d5a9'>er stoves: Comparison of International and Chinese water boiling test protocols</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>Yuanchen Chen, Guofeng Shen, Shu Su, Wei Du, Yibo Huangfu, Guangqing Liu, Xilong Wang, Baoshan Xing, Kirk R. Smith, Shu Tao</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt;color:blue'>Energy for Sustainable Development 32 (2016) 22–30</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'> </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>Ab s t r a c t</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>Biomass fuels are widely combusted in rural China, producing numerous air pollutants with great adverse</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>impacts on human health. Some improved cookstoves and pellet fuels have been promoted. To evaluate the</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>performance of pellet-gasifier stoves, efficiencies and pollutant emissions were measured following International</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>and Chinese water boiling tests (WBTs). Compared with traditional stoves and unprocessed biomass fuels,</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>increased efficiencies and lower emissions of pollutants including carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>(PM), parent and derivative polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were revealed for pellet-gasifier stoves.</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>However, the calculated emission rates (ERs) of CO and PM2.5 cannot meet the ER targets recently suggested</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>by WHO indoor air quality guidelines (IAQGs). Better control of air mixing ratio and gross flow rates of primary</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>and secondary air supply greatly reduced emissions and increased efficiencies. Differences among testing protocols</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>are the key factors affecting the evaluation of stove performance. With longer burning duration and higher</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>power, the Chinese WBT had statistically higher efficiencies, gas temperature, and lower pollutant emissions</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>(p b 0.10) compared to those obtained through the International WBT. Statistically significant differences</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>between the two protocols indicate the need for further efforts in emission tests and methodology development</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>before the release of a well-accepted international testing protocol</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'> </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'> </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt'>---------------------------<br></span><span lang=EN-US>Kirk R. Smith, MPH, PhD<br>Professor of Global Environmental Health<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span lang=EN-US>Chair, Graduate Group in Environmental Health Sciences<br>Director of the Global Health and Environment Program<br>School of Public Health<br>747 University Hall<br>University of California<br>Berkeley, California, 94720-7360<br>phone 1-510-643-0793; fax 642-5815<br><a href="mailto:krksmith@berkeley.edu">krksmith@berkeley.edu</a><br><a href="http://www.kirkrsmith.org/">http://www.kirkrsmith.org/</a><br><br><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><br><br><o:p></o:p></span></p><pre><span lang=EN-US>To unsubscribe from this list go to:<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><a href="https://calmail.berkeley.edu/manage/list/reminder/stove@lists.berkeley.edu">https://calmail.berkeley.edu/manage/list/reminder/stove@lists.berkeley.edu</a><o:p></o:p></span></pre></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></body></html>