<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Nikhil,<br>
<br>
You wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">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"? </blockquote>
No.<br>
<br>
Different stoves can handle the differences in fuel chemistry in
different ways. That is why some stove types are better than other
for certain fuels. A fuel type is not inherently good or bad.
Same for stove types. Stoves and fuels need to "work together" and
that is evaluated with quantitative means.<br>
<br>
I see no purpose in such a database. I will gladly look at such a
database when you and/or others have produced it. To me, other
tasks are much more worthwhile.<br>
<br>
Paul<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:psanders@ilstu.edu">psanders@ilstu.edu</a>
Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.drtlud.com">www.drtlud.com</a></pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/27/2016 2:23 PM, Traveller wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAK27e==DtDF6uVEYXtjFRJQVJYZSSkwqFJXB=b=2-W3tKyhqyQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<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 moz-do-not-send="true"
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 moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:psanders@ilstu.edu" target="_blank">psanders@ilstu.edu</a>
Skype: paultlud Phone: <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:%2B1-309-452-7072" value="+13094527072" target="_blank">+1-309-452-7072</a>
Website: <a moz-do-not-send="true" 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 moz-do-not-send="true"
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
moz-do-not-send="true"
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
moz-do-not-send="true"
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>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>