<div dir="ltr">Dear Paul: <br><br>Thank you for indulging me. I don't think I would advocate anything on the basis of technical design and performance. Nobody would or should believe me. <br><br>Yes, I was naughty. But you also noticed I gave an alternative to preparing the fuel - purchasing it at an indicative price, say USc 10 per kilo. <br><br>I agree wholeheartedly with you "<span style="font-size:12.8px">when something is new or unknown to someone, do not expect that person to intuitively independently understand what is new. Therefore, we "instruct" and "market" and "lead" and "demonstrate" etc to spread knowledge, with the hope that the unknowing person might understand and at least consider and maybe even adopt what is new."</span><br><br>True, "<span style="font-size:12.8px">Not all leading questions mislead. " And I am prepared to even mislead, if it somehow means getting better and effective solutions, in this case stoves and fuels that people want. </span><br><br>My interest, plainly put, is simply this -- what is the role of public budgets in supporting new cooking technologies desired by the poor and what is the rationale? <br><br>If not the stove - for a variety of reasons, competitive subsidy to stove producers does not seam feasible - the fuel can be subsidized. Hence my question about purchasing at "USc 10 per kilo." <br><br>While I know nothing about stove design, perhaps it is too much to expect a single stove design to adapt to all types and qualities of solid biomass throughout the year. It may be easier to separate out a niche for TLUD market potential where purchased fuel is competitive with current and expected alternatives. <br><br>In short, what is worth subsidizing, how and by how much, how long, to what end? I have seen no real delineation of geographic market and competition for any country in the world, not even with otherwise fairly sensible consultant reports to GACC. So it is impossible to even get started on a sensible policy discussion. Just hoping that some donor somewhere would be tired enough or pressed enough to throw a couple of hundred million dollars into RD&D or loan guarantee funds isn't much of an answer. There is a market, a vibrant "economy and culture" in constant change at the farm, village and household levels. What should a government do? <br><br>I write erratically, because I don't have an answer to many, many questions and I refuse to accept answers proffered in terms of saving trees or climate, or reduction of premature mortality. Least of all on the basis of what Cecil calls the "<span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:calibri,"slate pro",sans-serif,sans-serif;font-size:medium">fundamental foolishness of expecting abstract ISO standards, metrics, and household stove performance tests to lead the stovers and stove producers of the planet into a paradise of smokeless pollution free biomass cooking and space heating.</span>"<br><br>This iSO enterprise doesn't even bother to ask leading questions. They are armed with the weaponry of models and fiction of unrepresentative behaviors. <br><br>As Marie Antoinette might say, "Let'em Boil Water!" :-) <br><br>Thanks, again. I will comment on your other post later. <br><br>Nikhil<br><br><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br><br><br></span></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:12.8px">------------------------------------------------------------------------</span><br style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:12.8px"><span style="font-size:12.8px"><font face="georgia, serif">Nikhil Desai</font></span></div><div><span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:12.8px">(India +91) 909 995 2080</span><font face="georgia, serif"><br style="font-size:12.8px"><i style="font-size:12.8px">Skype: nikhildesai888</i></font><span style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif"><font face="Arial"><br></font></span></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Paul Anderson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:psanders@ilstu.edu" target="_blank">psanders@ilstu.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><span class="">
Nikhil wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">I have already said I know nothing about
TLUD or for that matter design of biomass stoves.</blockquote></span>
and his suggested question:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">3. Do you [the stove user] like to cut your
wood in fine pieces? </blockquote>
<br>
Now THAT is a leading question!!!!<br>
<br>
The issue of small pieces of fuel is NOT about the preparation of
small pieces by the stove user (because some fuels are already that
size and because fuel preparation can be a useful livelihood for
some people who solve the fuel preparation challenges, such as by
refinery operators making LPG and companies that produce pellets).
<br>
<br>
Instead, the issue of small pieces of fuel relates very much to
their very good functioning in some stoves (TLUDs) about which the
stove users might have no knowledge (and that includes Nikhil). <br>
<br>
So, when something is new or unknown to someone, do not expect that
person to intuitively independently understand what is new.
Therefore, we "instruct" and "market" and "lead" and "demonstrate"
etc to spread knowledge, with the hope that the unknowing person
might understand and at least consider and maybe even adopt what is
new.<br>
<br>
I have great faith that when Nikhil does understand TLUD stoves that
he could become an advocate. We know a lot of people (including
some stove designers) who have greatly increased their interest in
TLUD stoves in the past few years, after many years of denial or
even strong resistance.<br>
<br>
And many of them still do not appreciate the char-making attributes
of TLUD stoves. <br>
<br>
There is much instruction and marketing yet to be done about so many
topics and to so many people.<br>
<br>
Not all leading questions mislead. <br>
<br>
Paul<br>
<br>
<pre cols="72">Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email: <a href="mailto:psanders@ilstu.edu" target="_blank">psanders@ilstu.edu</a>
Skype: paultlud Phone: <a href="tel:%2B1-309-452-7072" value="+13094527072" target="_blank">+1-309-452-7072</a>
Website: <a href="http://www.drtlud.com" target="_blank">www.drtlud.com</a></pre><div><div class="h5">
<div>On 8/30/2016 9:10 AM, Nikhil Desai
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="auto">
<div>Moderator: I changed the subject line. <br>
<br>
Ron:</div>
<div><br>
Thank you for indulging me. I wonder if I thoroughly lost
you with my blabber on "leading questions". I learnt the
term in drafting legal testimonies, but the issue is also
relevant to survey design. See <a href="http://survey.cvent.com/blog/market-research-design-tips-2/survey-design-pitfalls-leading-questions-and-loaded-words" target="_blank">http://survey.cvent.com/<wbr>blog/market-research-design-<wbr>tips-2/survey-design-pitfalls-<wbr>leading-questions-and-loaded-<wbr>words</a>. <br>
<br>
The real question is, who is the survey for and what are you
trying to sell? <br>
<br>
Seeking convenient answers is a human weakness; pollsters do
it all the time. No sin, just possibly an error. <br>
<br>
Product design and testing, marketing, selling, providing
after-sales service and taking care of both legal and
illegal risks, is a serious business. Even some parts of
academia deal with it. <br>
<br>
But it seems we have an overabundance of scientism -
unwarranted beliefs in unscientific assertions just because
they are uttered by bureaucratic scientists (I trust
ExxonMobil scientists more than USEPA scientists, but you
probably know that already) - and under-enthusiastic
customer base. This is ok, even normal, but not when 50
years of selling to donor bureaucrats has produced repeated
failures, <br>
<br>
Oh, well. We sell best what we are good at - promises - to
our eager customer base - ideologues of environmentalism.
From saving trees to lives to climate, we latch on to the
fad of the decade. (I have done that too, so please don't
take this personally.) <br>
<br>
Today we seek to satisfy the priests of USEPA/GACC cult via
catechism of Protocols of Water Boiling Tests in
Laboratories. Tomorrow we could write a White Paper on
Biomass Stoves and Planetary Health. (You see, Lancet would
publish anything, so long as enough heads nod. Look up its
reports of Commission on Climate Change or Commission on
Planetary Health.) Why, in five years you and I could
prepare a Progress Report on Biomass Stoves' Contribution to
Sustainable Development Goals of 2035. With enough money, I
could even write a paper that developing countries'
transition to cooking with electricity from modern
coal-fired plants (with USEPA-approved BACTs) reduces the
chance of sea level rise by 22 cm in 2200. <br>
<br>
I wish I led a cult too. I wouldn't hesitate a bit in
writing, "TLUD stoves save trees, grow bigger gardens,
reduce global warming, and make cooks happier and richer."
I could cite customer surveys in support. Convenient facts
always trounce inconvenient truths. Just need to ask the
right leading questions; there are suckers eager to be
misled. </div>
<div><br>
Just about as scientific as the Global Burden of Disease
report - with assignation of a single cause of death to some
50+ million deaths a year, whether or not what doctors'
certificates exist and what they say, then concocting
allocation of premature mortality to diseases and risk
factors - but we would need another Bill and Melinda, at
least another Harvard. <br>
<br>
And certainly more scientific than the USEPA/GACC technique
of predicting exposures, disease and death from lab tests of
boiling water on the one hand and pretentious accuracy of
"relative risk" predicted from, well, questionable surveys,
dubious sampling, meta-analysis and all that academic jazz. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>But I digress. Back to TLUD. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I have already said I know nothing about TLUD or for that
matter design of biomass stoves. I wish any seller success
so long as the buyer is a happier cook. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And I don't mean cooks of fancy feasts of
self-righteousness for the rich donors with rich theories. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Who is your customer? What is your service standard? What
is the objective? I raised those questions the very first
post this time around, and I haven't heard a thing from
anybody. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Whose problem - and what problem - is sought to be
solved, by whom and why?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>On that some other time. You asked me to revise your
questions, not raise my questions. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Let me state questions I would like to be asked as a
buyer of any stove-fuel technology. I resent having to
answer questions in order to make some donor and his
research consultants happy, but I know we all have to serve
our ladies and lords. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And if you have to sell to governments like our Chaiwalla
Prime Minister - whose picture is on nearly every petrol
pump in India, on huge billboards announcing his LPG scheme
for empowering women - you may have to ask different kinds
of questions. If I were his finance minister, I might ask
you, "How many votes can you swing in five years?" </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Oh, sorry. Not my questions again. Your questions,
assuming you want to sell something to a cook, with enough
money to be able to buy some food items and fuel for a month
at a time (not get them every day or three times a week),
and has enough time for cooking (and not worry about another
job outside home or any household chores or time to read to
a child or watch TV at a neighbor's).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>1. How much does charcoal sell for around here? How would
you sell it if you sold it?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>2. Do you want to leave a stove unattended for an hour?
What times and how often?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>3. Do you like to cut your wood in fine pieces? Or would
you buy your fuel at 10 USc a kilo?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>4. When it gets warmer around here, what do you do - get
out of the kitchen?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>5. What does your garden fetch you? How do you fertilize
it? How much is it worth to you if your cooking produced
just the fertilizer you want (because I say so)? </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I too wrote in favor of cooking solutions for the poor in
terms of co-benefits of GHG reduction and health in order to
please donors and their research consultants. I will readily
do so again if I got a half million dollars to help move a
few billion dollars to the poor to help them buy fuels and
stoves of their choice. I have no problem beseeching the
donors, misleading USEPA bureaucrats; after all, they only
have their careers to worry about, and "happier cooks" are
only an incidental co-benefit. <br>
<br>
Who knows, if we liberated tomorrow's mothers from the
drudgery of cooking and instead invest in their and their
children's education, we might have some more environmental
regulators. Win, win, win!</div>
<div><br>
Nikhil</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
Nikhil Desai
<div>+91 909 995 2080</div>
<div>Skype: nikhildesai888</div>
</div>
<div><br>
On Aug 30, 2016, at 12:16 AM, "Ronal W. Larson" <<a href="mailto:rongretlarson@comcast.net" target="_blank">rongretlarson@comcast.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>Nikhil:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>I made six
positive claimed points about TLUDs. How about your
rephrasing each to help (or restrain) we who are trying
to sell a (claimed) improved stove?Same request to
Cecil.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Ron</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On Aug 29, 2016, at 10:01 PM, Nikhil Desai <<a href="mailto:pienergy2008@gmail.com" target="_blank">pienergy2008@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br>
<div>
<div dir="auto">
<div>Ron:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I know nothing @TLUD, but I won't think much
of answers to these questions one way or
another. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>But I do consider these to be "leading
questions" meant to elicit a biased answer. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>It is tragic to see people falling in the
trap of believing themselves by getting
convenient confirmations by means of leading
questions. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Am I not correct? :-)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Not that I want to be. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I salute unshakeable faith as the method of
21st Century "science".</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Now ask me when I stopped lying. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Anybody out to measure intelligence and
desire knows neither. S/he is just one blind
among many in the zoo trying to define an
elephant. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Please excuse my impudence. I have no desire
- for a biomass stove - nor intelligence. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As always, wrong questions guarantee wrong
answers. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>N</div>
<div><br>
Nikhil Desai
<div>+91 909 995 2080</div>
<div>Skype: nikhildesai888</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>