<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Stovers, (sorry this is a long
message, but I think you will find it lively. At least read what
is at the bottom.)<br>
<br>
On 11/6/2016 2:18 PM, Traveller wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
Maybe someone wants to prove Kirk Smith wrong - for him saying LPG
is <span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:verdana;font-size:13.3333px">"</span><font
style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" face="georgia, serif" size="4">the fuel
that could save millions of lives every year. • By definition!"</font><br>
<br>
That comment has great depth to it -- the way "Burden of Disease"
has been computed is by treating "Solid Fuel Use" as the sole
source of Household Air Pollution (with quantities and emission
factors cooked up in collective fantasies). Therefore, LPG is the
savior fuel BY DEFINITION. <br>
<br>
I have no problem with that, </blockquote>
I can agree with Nikhil on that. LPG is good. Can save lives.
Fine. <br>
<br>
But let's separate the gasifier stoves from the 3-stone fires and
simple improved cookstoves. ESMAP (World Bank) did that in the
major 2015 document:
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="left: 114.718px; top: 249.661px; font-size: 38.7451px;
font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(1.00873);"
data-canvas-width="682.7273725490195">THE STATE OF THE GLOBAL
CLEAN </div>
<div style="left: 114.718px; top: 298.092px; font-size: 38.7451px;
font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(1.00098);"
data-canvas-width="665.2145882352941">AND IMPROVED COOKING
SECTOR</div>
</blockquote>
available at: <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/21878/96499.pdf?sequence=1">https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/21878/96499.pdf?sequence=1</a><br>
<br>
And the GACC certainly knows about it, because the GACC is the
co-publisher. And Kirk Smith knows about it.<br>
<br>
If you have not seen it, please take a look. Summary is on page
13, and a copy of that page is attached to this message (with yellow
highlights added by Anderson)<br>
<br>
The ESMAP and GACC publication CLEARLY classifies the gasifier
technology of solid biomass fuels as "Advanced ICS" (separate from
the Legacy, Basic, and Intermediate ICS stove technologies). The
Advanced ICS (gasifiers) is one of three of the major headings of
"Clean Cooking Solutions" along with the "Modern Fuel Stoves"
(fossil fuels LPG, Natural Gas, and Kerosene-with-footnote), and
with "Renewable Fuel Stoves" (Biogas, alcohols, solar).<br>
<br>
As Nikhil says, and I have agreed, Kirk Smith's comment about saving
lives "by definition" has some validity (if it was properly
qualitied about other "fuels" like alcohol as also saving lives BY
DEFINITION.). But he is not acknowledging or advocating alcohol
stoves, or natural gas stoves. LPG is clearly the glory child in
this case. (and dry biomass is the whipping boy).<br>
<br>
Using similar wording, I would like to say that the following is
also true:<br>
<br>
Gasifier stoves are <span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:verdana;font-size:13.3333px">"</span><font
style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" face="georgia, serif" size="4">the [stove
technology] that could save millions of lives every year. • By
definition!"<br>
</font><br>
AND<br>
<br>
WHEN USED WITH MODERN, PROVEN, AVAILABLE GASIFIER STOVES, then wood
(chips, segments, pellets, etc) AND even agricultural refuse (maize
cobs, briquettes of stems,) and even appropriate dung cubes are <span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:verdana;font-size:13.3333px">"</span><font
style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" face="georgia, serif" size="4">the fuels
that could save millions of lives every year. • By definition!"<br>
<br>
</font><font style="color:rgb(0,0,0)"> I have written my agreement
with what Kirk Smith has written, I hope he will write his
agreement with what I have written.</font><font
style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" size="4"><br>
</font><br>
I also add: Perhaps the medical / health evidence is strong for
gasifers, but not as strong as for LPG. I can accept that. BUT,
for every household that can be supplied with LPG SUSTAINABLY,
there are thousands (or tens of thousands?) of households that can
be SUSTAINABLY fueled with dry biomass fuel and gasifier stoves. <br>
<br>
Therefore, for actual "body counts" of how many millions of lives
will be saved, my bet is that gasifiers (when adequately supported
for use in impoverished homes) will out-perform the LPG / fossil
fuel by 100 to 1. <br>
<br>
Nikhil wrote (and I agree) that Nikhil has a problem<br>
<blockquote type="cite">just with the assumption that solid fuel use
is by definition "dirty". Fuels don't have "dirtiness" embedded in
them; processed solid fuels can achieve better combustion and of
course highly controlled combustion and proper ash management can
also achieve far cleaner combustion that what is assumed to be the
case.</blockquote>
<br>
Summary: Except that LPG is a carbon positive fossil fuel, I have
no complaints about the promotion of LPG cookstoves. <br>
<br>
Well, there is actually one additional issue. The amounts of
financial and in-kind assistance that are given to LPG should ALSO
be given to the gasifier stoves. How much? Equal amount in
total? Or equal amount per household served? Or maybe
one-quarter of the amount of each household served by LPG? On a
dollar for dollar basis (or even 1 :4 ratio), gasifier stoves can
easily reach and benefit more poor people in developing societies
than can LPG. <br>
<br>
Let me repeat that, this time as a challenge:<br>
<font size="+2">On a dollar for dollar basis (or even 1 :4 ratio),
gasifier stoves can easily reach and benefit more poor people in
developing societies than can LPG. </font><br>
<br>
Such a research question would bring more funding for gasifier
stoves that has ever been available!! But that is not my purpose.
I am not against LPG.<br>
<br>
My purpose is to simply say that it is about time for some serious
funding for gasifier stoves into the households that can utilize
them. A great example is the Case Study of TLUD stoves in Deganga,
India (on the Internet since 30 September this year, and featured at
my website <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.drtlud.com">www.drtlud.com</a> ).<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>
</body>
</html>