<div dir="ltr">Rnn: <br><br>Thank you. I have been busy looking for woodstove shops on Cape Cod. None. <br><br>I was as disappointed as you are with me. I found some kitchens with - egad, ventilator fans!! <br><br>What has come of EPA and MASSDEP?? Restaurants with foreign food - Portuguese, Chinese (Trump alert!) - are polluting the outside air, the pristine air of Provincetown! (Pictures attached). <br><br>Where are WHO and EPA modeling emission rates and concentrations over the Atlantic, the east coast of US and Canada? At $9 million per saved statistical life, it's a crime that our dear Global Alliance and Global modelers of premature mortality are ignoring the lives of say, Nantucket residents (median family income $90,000+)? <br><br>****<br>What soured me on what is marketed as science? Well, the marketing. Of spurious theories and concocted data. <br><br>But that is ok. Science evolves. New paradigms emerge. Science struggles through. <br><br>What stinks to high heaven, however, is the abuse of science by the advocates, the saviors of the poor ready to market ADALYs. <br><br>I don't celebrate my ignorance. I do object to volunteered blindness. <br><br>I have a single positive suggestion -- dump the ISO exercise. Get out of the box mentality, look at the cook and food, not fuel ideologies. <br><br>Nikhil<br><br><div class="gmail_extra"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"> </div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 12:04 AM, Ronal W. Larson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rongretlarson@comcast.net" target="_blank">rongretlarson@comcast.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div>Nikhil, cc list</div><div><br></div><div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>I apologize for not responding sooner. Been busy.</div><div><br></div><div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>I find your response below to be most disappointing. It is clear that you have no use for WHO, EPA, GACC, Michael Johnson - and essentially no-one on this list - many/most of whom have put in many years in trying to develop cleaner, fuel-saving stoves. I have no idea on what has soured you on science.</div><div><br></div><div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>Dr. Michael Johnson, who was the key presenter in this webinar had been asked to develop a methodology to help countries solve indoor air pollution problems - that included stoves but was for more than stoves. I thought his work was outstanding; he answered an important question that many of are interested in. It is clear you had/have no idea of what either he nor WHO is trying to do.</div><div><br></div><div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>I have not seen you give one single positive idea from you about helping the aim of this list. Your satire leaves me cold. Your humor leaves me cold.</div><div><br></div><div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>I ask that you stick to the topic of this list - which does not include supporting the use of coal or ridiculing those who are concerned about global warming. It does not include giving advice such as your last line:</div><div><br></div><div><span class=""><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:12.8px"><i>The rest is blogal noise of vested interests who know nothing about the poor, nor care. </i></span></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span></span>I have read nothing by you that gives you the right to be so insulting to very bright and highly motivated scientists like Dr. Johnson - or most on this list. It is clear too me that you know nothing about the poor yourself, nor about stoves.<br><br></div><div><br></div><div>Ron</div><div><div class="h5"><div><br></div><br><div><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Sep 14, 2016, at 2:51 PM, Traveller <<a href="mailto:miata98@gmail.com" target="_blank">miata98@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br><div><div dir="ltr"><font face="georgia, serif">Ron had asked us all "</font><span style="font-size:12.8px">I suggest waiting until after this </span><span style="font-size:12.8px">webinar</span><span style="font-size:12.8px"> to answer your questions about WHO and stoves."</span><div><font face="georgia, serif"><br></font></div><div><font face="georgia, serif">There was no mention of Daniel Wilson's ES&T paper. <br></font></div><div><font face="georgia, serif"><br></font></div><div><font face="georgia, serif">I watched much of the Webinar. It was quite an entertainment. Comedy. Tragedy. Horror. Drama. Action. </font><br clear="all"><div><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:12.8px"><br>I am not enlightened. Can anybody tell me if s/he was able to find light - or heat? <br><br>Priesthood of any sect/cult narrates platitudes around which questions can or cannot be asked and answered. </span></div><div><span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:12.8px">I don't remember any mention of that four-letter word FOOD. <br><br>A stove can do many things - the glass top electric ranges are as good as a table top. <br><br>And a stove can get dirty in a myriad of ways. Cooking IS dirty; just ask anybody who has had to clean a stove or a kitchen. <br><br>But we have most Quixotic adventurers, tilting at the windmills, in search of "clean air". Via box models. Clean kitchen or clean food - or the quality of food - are assumed to be irrelevant to the question of cooking and health. <br><br>Find your little sandbox and play. Let someone else bother about food and health. <br><br>-------------<br><br>WHO will save the people? <br><br>Not WHO. <br><br>My humble (!) suggestion to well-meaning stove designers: Avoid and ignore advocates' deceit and pretense of knowledge. Don't insult the pursuit of knowledge - with all the qualifiers about assumptions and uncertainties that researchers do emphasize but the ritual of cite-o-logy ignores. It is unethical to be guided by unconvincing science just because it is done by scientists. <br><br>What is to be done? a) Keep on innovating for specific geographic markets, considering a variety of fuels and appliances, focusing first and foremost on "cook food"; b) Formulate your ideas of market size and timing; c) Understand your customers' desires but also keep in mind that desires and needs are pliable and change in response to factors beyond your control; can you make just a fifth of the customers in a particular geographic market adapt your stove/fuel solution enthusiastically? If anybody comes to buy a second stove - even if the first one is virtually given away - that's the proof of your design. d) Yes, emissions, exposures, fuel consumption, time taken to cook, are all relevant to customers, but you really don't know who weighs what more than others, and what other things (fuel cycle management drudgery) <br><br></span><span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:12.8px">The rest is blogal noise of vested interests who know nothing about the poor, nor care. </span><span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:12.8px"><br><br>Nikhil<br><br> </span></div></div></div></div></div>
</div></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>