<div dir="ltr">Dear Paul: <br><br>I am afraid you misunderstand me. <br><br>The difference between "clean cooking" and "clean cookstoves" is not mere playing with words. <br><br>Words matter. Numbers matter. <br><br>Metrics, measurement methods, assumptions, model structures matter. <br><br>"Clean" is a matter of exposures, and quantitative causal relationship between exposure and disease incidence at individual level is a matter worth debating. (WHO's own evidence reviews admit as much.) <br><br>There is much more to cooking than just "clean". I don't think the science of stoves will match the science of cooking, leave alone the art. <br><br>Who is going to declare what are "clean cookstoves" and how? <br><br>The ISO IWA exercise with WHO/EPA lab testing, voluntary emission rate targets, and presumptuous forecasts of averted DALYs is not science.<br><br>It is artfulness. <br><br>Since you do agree "Of course there are fuel issues," would you join me in a call to compile fuel chemistry database for all the alleged "evidence" of "emission factors" for "solid fuels"? <br><br>Nikhil<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:12.8px"><br>--------- </span></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 10:25 AM, 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:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Nikhil,<br>
<br>
Your message is based on playing with words, trying to make "Clean
Cookstoves" into a silly term because there can be fuel issues. Of
course there are fuel issues and stove issues. That does not make
the topic silly.<br>
<br>
If this was just silly stuff, I would not have spent 15 years of my
life helping to bring TLUD stoves to the top of the solid biomass
stoves. <br>
<br>
If you think that clean cookstoves are silly and not important,
then you are writing to the wrong group of people. <br>
<br>
Paul<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="gmail-h5">
<div>On 9/27/2016 9:13 AM, Traveller wrote:<br>
</div>
</div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="gmail-h5">
<div dir="ltr">Teddy:<br>
<br>
Thank you. That news item has great relevance to this list. <br>
<br>
There are no "clean car engines" per se; their alleged cleanness
or "emission rates" depend on fuel quality. <br>
<br>
Which is why "Clean Cookstoves" - global alliances or blogal
dalliances - is a silly term. <br>
<br>
There are no "clean cookstoves" per se; only in combination with
fuels, and in the context of operating practices and local
environment (ventilation, wind, ambient air quality, other
sources of emissions ranging from food and smoking to open
waste.) <br>
<br>
The scientist collective at the ISO 2012 IWA on cookstoves (<a href="https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:iwa:11:ed-1:v1:en" style="font-size:12.8px" target="_blank">Guidelines for
evaluating cookstove performance</a><span style="font-size:12.8px">) <br>
<br>
"</span><span style="font-size:12.8px">"</span><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.3333px">recognizes
that the quality and type of fuel used by a testing centre may
impact the emissions of a cookstove. Because of that, the
International Workshop on Cookstoves recommends that testing
centres document the key physical and operational
characteristics (e.g. fuel, moisture content, pot size and
shape) of the system."</span><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br>
</span>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:12.8px"><br>
</span><span style="font-size:12.8px">Whatever
little I know suggests that temperatures and
air flows determine the ratio and composition
of PICs and that at relatively low
temperatures and irregular air flows, fuel
chemistry plays a critical role. But there's
nothing here about chemical composition.</span><br style="font-size:12.8px">
<br style="font-size:12.8px">
<span style="font-size:12.8px">Is it any wonder
folks go mumbling about "solid fuels", "dirty
fuels"? (More on that later.)</span><br>
<br>
WHO/GBD claims on the "global dataset for
cooking fuel use" are bubbly champagne - or dope
- served up to minors. (Remember the song
"Goodnight, farewell" in Sound of Music where
Liesel asks for her first taste of champagne?)<br>
<br>
Let me put it bluntly - WHO has manufactured a
"global emergency" based on non-existent data
and questionable intelligence. (<a href="http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/204717/1/9789241565233_eng.pdf" target="_blank">Burning
Opportunity</a>, marketing the GBD adventure
of killing by assumption as a <a href="http://www.ccacoalition.org/en/news/new-who-report-household-air-pollution-driving-global-health-emergency" target="_blank">global
health emergency</a>) <br>
<br>
Clean Cookstoves are dirty business. <br>
<br>
I for one do not believe one needs convincing
evidence to act on reducing pollution exposures
of vulnerable populations. The challenge is not
compiling reams and reams of dubious data and
faulty forecasts - of YLD and YLL - but to
please the cooks. <br>
<br>
Ron here thinks I have soured on science. Living
in Washington, I am familiar with the politics
of science and the science of politics. What is
going on is corrupting intelligence. There is an
emergency in "global health", namely, it has
little to do with individual health. <br>
<br>
Nikhil<br>
<span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:12.8px"><br>
<br>
--------- </span></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></blockquote></div></div></div>