<div dir="ltr">Dear list and Nikhil<div><p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I am glad
that my paper reached your attention, I was planning to share it with the list anyway.
<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">The purpose
of the paper was to do an exploratory analysis of the effects of LPG subsidies
in LAC on reducing the use of solid fuels. <span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Nikhil said
that the paper does not mention LPG prices or subsidies. This is not true. It
says:<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">“Subsidies
vary significantly between countries. For example, in 2013 the cost per kg of
LPG with subsidy was USD$0.65 in the Dominican Republic, USD$0.6 in Brazil, USD
$0.44 in El Salvador, USD$0.33 in Bolivia, USD$0.13 in Ecuador and USD$0.07 in
Venezuela (OLADE, 2012; Kojima, 2013b).” The idea was to compare level of
subsidies between those countries and therefore we use the same unit (kg).<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">We did not
mention firewood prices, as they vary a lot even in a given country, and precisely
in the paper we acknowledge that firewood usually is cheap or even free in LAC.
With the exception of some urban cities, LPG would never compete with firewood
prices, unless there is a big subsidy. <span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Nikhil is
right, we give an example without mentioning the size of the cylinder or the
amount of firewood bought. We wrote: “Kojima’s
studies on the response of users to relative prices indicate that firewood prices
would need to increase considerably before a household would consider replacing
firewood for LPG for economic reasons. In Mexico for instance, a study
performed by the authors (to be published) in two rural communities of Chiapas in
February 2017, showed that 59% of the households already pay in average 370
pesos (US$ 20) per month to buy firewood. The cost of a LPG cylinder is 300
pesos (USD 16) and people that use LPG exclusively in these communities buy a
cylinder every three or four weeks. When asked why not they use LPG to cook all
their meals, 96% said because they cannot afford it. When asked if they will
use it if the cost of the cylinder was 50 pesos, 82% said they would use it,
but 14% said maybe and 4% said no, because there are other considerations
besides the price, as for example, the difficulty to make tortillas with a
regular LPG stove.” The reason we did not have the need to give that
information was again, because what we wanted to show was that many households
are already spending almost the same amount of money per month in firewood that
what they would need for LPG. The example was intended to show that reasons
behind firewood use are more complex than just the assumption that because you
already spend money buying firewood you are going to switch to LPG. It is a
good example that to take something from a paper completely out of context can be
misleading. <span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">We mentioned India with the only purpose of showing the efforts of some
countries to modify universal subsidies that are very difficult to reform:<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">“</span><span lang="EN-US">Many countries
are seeking strategies to reform universal subsidies to better target the
poorest population, as is the case of El Salvador. I</span><span lang="EN">n India, a national program called "give it
up" is asking middle class members to give up their LPG subsidy (US$
30-40), which will be transferred to a poor family. 30,000 people each month
are donating their subsidy, representing a shift of US$ 1 trillion to the poor
(The Economic Times, 2016).” It is completely irrelevant for the paper. Again,
why do you center your attack to the paper in examples that have nothing to do
with the main line of research? That it is: subsidies seem to have helped switching
to LPG the solid fuel users in urban areas in Bolivia and El Salvador and
almost everybody in Ecuador and Venezuela. Targeted subsidies may be an option
to increase access to clean fuels by 2030. <span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN">Finally, we do not
represent public health and promoting clean fuels when possible is not a war against
solid fuels. It is my aspiration that one day everybody has access to clean
fuels for all their needs, and this may require switching to electricity,
biogas and other clean fuels (clean from the point of view of health). It may
require the development of new technologies that may use solid fuels. Helping
poor people to have access to LPG or electricity with a subsidy may be part of
the solution. <span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN">Karin Troncoso</span></p></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
<br><br>
Message: 13<br>
Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 09:52:49 +0530<br>
From: Nikhil Desai <<a href="mailto:pienergy2008@gmail.com">pienergy2008@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves<br>
<<a href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org">stoves@lists.bioenergylists.<wbr>org</a>><br>
Subject: [Stoves] Another attack on solid fuels by public health<br>
adventurers<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAK27e=nkuo7S1Y_0Og0=c==xeO=<a href="mailto:6c6mL7V4nzNtb12jA94WAJg@mail.gmail.com">6<wbr>c6mL7V4nzNtb12jA94WAJg@mail.<wbr>gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Available for free for a few days more. LPG fuel subsidies in Latin America<br>
and the use of solid fuels to cook<br>
<<a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421517302719" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.sciencedirect.com/<wbr>science/article/pii/<wbr>S0301421517302719</a>>, Karin<br>
Troncoso, forthcoming in Energy Policy Volume 107, August 2017, Pages<br>
188?196<br>
<br>
"This study analyzes the relation between fuel subsidies to LPG and solid<br>
fuel use."<br>
<br>
Without mentioning LPG price or a subsidy. Where the price of a cylinder is<br>
mentioned, the size of the cylinder is not mentioned. And when expenditure<br>
on fuelwood is mentioned, the volume/weight of the purchase is not<br>
mentioned.<br>
<br>
It's cite-o-logy galore, peppering platitudes by throwing in some names and<br>
dates at the end, as if that shows any proof of validity of the assertion.<br>
<br>
Any purpose to this?<br>
<br>
Simple. The Quixotic war against solid fuels.<br>
<br>
Public health (profession) can be a risk factor for solid fuel use.<br>
<br>
Take this sentence "India opted for a voluntary program called ?give it up?<br>
that asks middle class LPG consumers to give up their LPG fuel subsidy<br>
(US$16 per year), which is transferred to a poor family. As of April 2016,<br>
10 million people had adhered to the program (The Economic Times, 2016<br>
<<a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421517302719#bib41" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.sciencedirect.com/<wbr>science/article/pii/<wbr>S0301421517302719#bib41</a>><br>
)."<br>
<br>
What utter baloney to say "10 million people had adhered to the program".<br>
GiveItUp and alleged transfer of the subsidy to a poor family is a gimmick.<br>
Most of those "given up" subsidies were fictitious or not utilized in the<br>
first place, but our Modi government is as good at cooking up numbers as<br>
WHO and if $16 a year or less than one US penny a day per capita is the<br>
LPG price subsidy in India, there are a few billion dollars somewhere in<br>
the gutters of Indian cities.<br>
<br>
Lesson: Skip the whole paper. I am collecting gratitude at the rate of<br>
$1.90 per capita per day.<br>
<br>
DOES ANY BODY CARE<br>
<br>
Nikhil<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<wbr>------------------------------<wbr>------------<br>
Nikhil Desai<br>
(India +91) 909 995 2080<br>
Skype: nikhildesai888<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170520/f39efa8a/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.<wbr>org/pipermail/stoves_lists.<wbr>bioenergylists.org/<wbr>attachments/20170520/f39efa8a/<wbr>attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>