<div dir="ltr">Crispin: <br><br>What does it matter that "<span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,"Slate Pro",sans-serif,sans-serif;font-size:medium">It is agreed by everyone that I can find that the WBT does not predict performance in use." </span>if the performance metric itself is irrelevant? <br><br>All your belaboring is that WBT doesn't predict efficiency in use and that there are valid theoretical reasons that it simply cannot. <br><br>I argue that there isn't an iota of evidence that efficiency is the performance metric around which users select stoves or organize their cooking practices. <br><br>Even if you don't agree with me, all it says is that "It is agreed by not everyone". <br><br>The fundamental problem is one of legality. Anybody can do anything they want, measure the length of women's skirt as indicative of temperature and wind for example. Makes no difference that it doesn't reliably predict actual weather if everybody agrees that it is good enough approximation. <br><br>Nothing is ever gained from expert disagreements. If WBT has harmed anybody, go to any court that would take up a case that use of WBT violated any particular regulation; since that claim cannot be made, arguing about it is useless. <br><br><div>Since everything that I see going on is private agents choosing to do as they please, it needs to be advertised -- and announced loud and clear -- that WBT is not reliable on efficiency. <br><br>I see no evidence at all that it - or any other protocol - has been found to be a good predictor of PM2.5 emission rates in actual use of stoves. <br><br>The sole rationale for test protocols is now in terms of PM2.5 emission rates because, as far as I can tell, PM2.5 ERTs are the limiting constraints for a solid fuel stove being put in Tier 4. <br><br>Yes, GACC might want it because then only LPG and electricity can be promoted. <br><br>But so what? What is your theory of change and theory of damage, as estimated by whom? It's not as if GACC and its donor governments are lined up with a billion dollars to spend on solid fuel stoves put in Tier 4 for PM2.5 hourly average emission rates. <br><br>You don't have a theory of change. You don't have a theory of damage. You are only complaining - and I joint you in complaining - that WBT falls short in its promises; I say that the promises are not worth a hoot to the cook. <br><br>Prove me wrong. What business are you in - beating a dead horse that has value only for Gold Standard and GACC? <br><br>Poor people have no enforceable right against EPA, the Empire Promotion Authority. This whole business smacks of exploiting poor girls of today who just may want a better stove on their own terms, not those of experts'. But it is the experts who make money, so once EPA funds run out, let's hope the next payor of the piper asks for different tunes. <br><br>Nikhil<br><br>PS: There is a double meaning in any assertion about "peer-reviewed". One is that when an opportunity is offered to contest a claim, some people capable of testing the claim and having the resources to do that test would honestly point out its potential pitfalls. As I tried to make obvious with my link to the WHO methodology on HAP GND 2012 methodology, this interpretation does not hold. All kinds of numbers were cooked up by passing the hat around for getting peer-approval stamps. <br><br>So the other interpretation is simply that "peer-reviewed" means an excuse to get one's errors - inadvertent or deliberate - past the invisible gatekeeper that is "scientific method" and "scientific integrity",and do anything one wishes. <br><br>That, unfortunately, is the state of so-called "stove science". Any thing goes. Find another payor to the pipers. Until then, John Mitchell rules, and Berkeley caravan (except Daniel Wilson, I suppose) rolls along. <br><br>Why don't you write to US government - say, Scott Pruitt; John Mitchell actually invited the listeners to the Winrock webinar last week to write to himself and cc Scott Pruitt - and UKAid, EU, all the European donors to GACC, CDM authorities, and Gold Standard Foundation that continued use of WBT and irrelevant "performance metrics' are crimes against humanity? </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><font face="georgia, serif">------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>Nikhil Desai</font></div><div><span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small">(US +1) 202 568 5831</span><font face="georgia, serif"><br><i>Skype: nikhildesai888</i><br></font><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 9:54 PM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:crispinpigott@outlook.com" target="_blank">crispinpigott@outlook.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="en-US" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);line-height:initial">
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
Dear Xavier</div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
Your last question is thought provoking. What can one protocol do that others cannot is an important question to address. </div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
It is agreed by everyone that I can find that the WBT does not predict performance in use. If any other protocol can do a better job, even if imperfectly, then it's use is a better choice because the purpose of testing and rating is to predict performance. </div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
The protocol used to test NO emissions in diesels was 'gamed' rather easily. Adopting a protocol that is difficult to game would be a better option. </div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
It is pretty obvious that Ron wants to have the unscientific WBT 'fuel consumption' metric applied to stoves that produce any amount of char. He has said so many times so don't expect a different answer. </div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
Nikhil: it is important that yo raised the same concern I had about the so-called 'Lime Consensus' which was advertised by Mitchell at the IWA meeting as the guide to the content of the IWA, which was written to contain a pre-stamped acceptance of the WBT as
'valid'. Fifteen or so people signed the document representing nearly none of the people using the stoves affected - on the entire planet. If taken seriously, the Lima document is an abrogation of the right to be consulted of nearly every poor person on the
planet who cooks - quite a large number, according to reports. </div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
I propose a parallel way forward: we create a spreadsheet that can accept as inputs the numbers generated for WBTs that makes valid calculations and normalizations in order to 'do the best we can' salvaging something useful from the work done to date. </div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
We could start with my proposed corrections from 2008 and later points raised about the PEMS spreadsheet. The invalid metrics for low power obviously have to be corrected, for example by removing the last step of dividing by the number of liters of water (which
is the stap that invalidates the result).</div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
The result would not be predictive, but it would significantly shift the positions of stoves on a 'stove performance comparison chart'. That alone has value as there are those using the chart as a general guide to stove selection, unaware of the misconceptions
underlying it. </div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
As for Kirk Smith's opinion of all WBT's from v3.1 on to v4.2.3 is, and I quote, "I cannot use a test method that has not been peer-reviewed."[January 2008, Seattle Washington meeting sponsored by PCIA hosting concerned parties from Africa (me), Europe (GTZ,
Philips) and about 20 from the US including a dozen from Aprovecho including Peter Scott, Dean and Nordica]</div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
When was the WBT peer-reviewed since then? It wasn't. That's why students of Kirk and the Berkeley team like Kathy Lask used the WBT 3.0 for their published research. Actions speak loudly in this case.
</div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<span style="line-height:initial"><br>
</span></div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<span style="line-height:initial">In case this needs verification I refer readers to a series of papers written by Kathy (three I think) on charcoal stove performance in Haiti. </span></div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<span style="line-height:initial"><br>
</span></div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<span style="line-height:initial">Whatever happened to the protocol between v3.0 and 3.1 it has not met the minimum of Kirk's requirements. Now, we have multiple peer-reviewed articles criticising the WBT on numerous grounds. At a minimum that should provoke
a recalculation based on current understanding of the validity of metrics and methods. </span></div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<span style="line-height:initial"><br>
</span></div>
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<span style="line-height:initial">Regards </span></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<div style="width:100%;font-size:initial;font-family:Calibri,'Slate Pro',sans-serif,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125);text-align:initial;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<span style="line-height:initial">Crispin </span></div></font></span><div><div class="h5">
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
<div id="m_-7625408531123022934_originalContent">
<div dir="ltr">Xavier: <br>
<br>
Private agents may do anything that is not prohibited. The trouble with WBT is that its use is not sanctioned (in both meanings of the term; isn't English wonderful?) <br>
<br>
Perhaps WBT is critical for some kind of "stove improvement" the way some people like it. The alternative is to designate a protocol that a government or an independent standard-setting agency can stand by. <br>
<br>
That is the real danger here - the self-proclaimed, self-styled "standards body" that is Gold Standard Foundation. They have no competence or interest in stove improvement of any kind; they just want to make merry as middlemen - first in the trendsetters of
"voluntary carbon" and then for marketing snake oil called aDALYs. <br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In fact, the only country I could locate that accepted - or plans to accept, I forget - the current WBT as its "standard" is Rwanda. <br>
<br>
There is some lethargy in continuing to use WBT for efficiency. Some vested interests maybe. Efficiency and PM2.5 hourly average emission rates do not achieve anything quantifiable when used as cardinal measures. Perhaps as ordinal measures during field testing. <br>
<br>
It is lethargy - combined with the dishonesty in offering ISO Tier Certificates - that you are up against. Real stove designers know that ratings can be gamed. <br>
<br>
And the powers-that-be behind the WHO PM2.5 ERTs were well aware that setting a PM2.5 Tier 4 emission target at such a level that ordinary solid fuel stoves cannot meet anytime soon was key to getting rid of solid fuels, those that poor people depend on. <br>
<br>
I don't know what PM2.5 measurements are available for the same fuel and stove by different protocols, especially ones used for field testing. Can you tell me whether WBT produces biased estimates for average hourly PM2.5 emission rate as
<u>compared to other protocols when used in the field</u>? <br>
<br>
That may be a clue to the EPA/GACC support for WBT - an ideology of "truly health protective" stoves based on PM2.5 emission rates. We know from the January 2017 paper on "implementation science" where Sumi Mehta and Kirk Smith were co-authors that "Tier 4
stoves" - meaning LPG and electricity - is their holy grail. Since "solid fuels use" was the proxy for pollutant exposure in WHO methodology for GBD, the logical conclusion is that solid fuels must be regulated out of existence. <br>
<br>
I submit that is the practical effect of WHO HFC Guidelines, no matter what supporters of WBT admit to. <br>
<br>
EPA had no authority to officially approve WBT or any other protocol for that matter. So it started the secretive route of IWA - which you too signed off on, I suppose; Mohsin had signed off on the Lima Consensus, I think - and TC-285. <br>
<br>
Just who had any official authority to sign off on the Lima Consensus or the IWA? Just because they claimed to have a stake doesn't mean their claims are valid. Authority goes together with responsibility; all I see is that the power was concentrated in the
US delegation, while USG had no legal authority to do anything for standards it would not adopt in the US. <br>
<br>
So it all boils down to John Mitchell. Michael Johnson and Dean Still are EPA contractors and have an understandable affinity to WBT; they are entitled to their views and interests, if only in protecting the historical legacy of WBT results. <br>
<br>
Just what authority John Mitchell had or has in sanctioning the use of WBT escapes me. He apparently did have an authority to contract, and needed some default protocol which WBT has been for a lot of helpless or lazy authorities. <br>
<br>
Why, CDM, Gold Standard, even ISO TC-285 (whose first DIS I bought and commented on this List; I can give you or others the details) are all going with the flow, the path of least resistance. <br>
<br>
I don't fault private persons and private adventures like Gold Standard for their interests and incentives. I see more of the same here - <a href="https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thestoveauction.org%2Fcatalogue-of-products.html&data=02%7C01%7C%7C66c1c9ac7c624e78955e08d53cfa738a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636481968730708905&sdata=JFO51pkBEB5FWUTDcNCg%2BDsFr5DQO3qlDxth5JmWvgk%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">http://www.thestoveauction.<wbr>org/catalogue-of-products.html</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Xavier Brandao <span dir="ltr">
<<a href="mailto:xav.brandao@gmail.com" target="_blank">xav.brandao@gmail.com</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 lang="FR">
<div class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397WordSection1">
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">Dear Ron,<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4"><u></u> <u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><font size="4">« I see no reason to slam those of us who believe that the WBT is critical to stove improvement. »<u></u><u></u></font></span></i></b></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">Some conversations are seasonal. They appear, vanish, and reappear after some time.<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">We are here because we want to discuss some important questions, explore them thoroughly, and try to shed light rather than cast shadow. I think we
need to be clear and specific about what we claim.<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4"><u></u> <u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">Ron, how about we continue the conversation where we left it? Because a few things remain unclear to me.<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">Last time we were discussing, I was asking you some questions in my email of the 02/09, and you were not answering.<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4"><u></u> <u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">Back in August, you were saying :<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><font size="4">« « The WBT IS valuable »<u></u><u></u></font></span></b></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">And I was asking you:<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">« Can you explain what is valuable about the WBT? »<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">And if I understood well your answers, you said that the WBT is valuable because:<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<font size="4"><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>1.<span style="font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125)">the TLUDs shine at it<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<font size="4"><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>2.<span style="font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125)">it has tier rankings, who are the right way to proceed with stove improvement<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4"><u></u> <u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">What if tier rankings are not scientifically valid?<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">Lombardi and al. say in their paper of February 2017:
<i>« An important consequence of these considerations is that the Tier of Performance of a given stove, assigned based on the results from WBT or similar protocols, may result in a not reliable performance indicator for technology selection. »<u></u><u></u></i></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><font size="4"><a href="https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sciencedirect.com%2Fscience%2Farticle%2Fpii%2FS096195341730065X&data=02%7C01%7C%7C66c1c9ac7c624e78955e08d53cfa738a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636481968730708905&sdata=rNeJHrdeb2mR0xPNsuE%2F5rGtd2oY3gkWrh%2BEW8M7Ozg%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">http://www.sciencedirect.com/s<wbr>cience/article/pii/S0961953417<wbr>30065X</a><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)">
<u></u><u></u></span></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4"><u></u> <u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">You listed the experts that were, according to you, currently, still advocating continued use of the WBT:<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<font size="4"><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span style="font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u></font><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">Jim Jetter</font><span style="font-size:12pt"><u></u><u></u></span></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Ranyee Chiang<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">John Mitchell<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Tami Bond<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Michael Johnson<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Kirk Smith<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Tom Miles<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Andrew Heggie<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span style="font-size:12pt">Dean Still<u></u></span><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4"> <wbr>
<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">I told you Ranyee Chiang said we were beyond the WBT.<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">I talked to Jim Jetter and he did not come accross to me as, currently, a strong supporter of the WBT anymore.<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">I talked to Tami Bond, and she said that the WBT had things to be criticized, and that we needed to move forward, and not look backward (the WBT). I
don’t think she strongly supports the WBT.<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">I talked to Kirk Smith in Delhi, and he didn’t seem to have an opinion, neither for nor against the WBT.<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">Dean Still is strongly supporting the WBT and its use.<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4"><u></u> <u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">Then Andrew reacted on the list and said he neither approved nor disapproved the WBT.<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4"><u></u> <u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">Which would leave as WBT supporters, according to you:</font><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">John Mitchell<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Michael Johnson<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Tom Miles<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Dean Still<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">Not even you are a supporter of the WBT, because you said you were no expert and had no opinion about it.<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4"><u></u> <u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">I sent you this link with alternative protocols<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><font size="4"><a href="https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdrive.google.com%2Fdrive%2Ffolders%2F0B5rmmRmIsdlnQlRQX3A1cXVOQ3M%3Fusp%3Dsharing&data=02%7C01%7C%7C66c1c9ac7c624e78955e08d53cfa738a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636481968730708905&sdata=kfrDlpI1np7WtdWfbIe5S%2FBJqPY3HD6qCvYNiBoH%2BUo%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">https://drive.google.com/drive<wbr>/folders/0B5rmmRmIsdlnQlRQX3A1<wbr>cXVOQ3M?usp=sharing</span></a><u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">and asked you what was so unique about the WBT that cannot be done by the CSI nor HTP.<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4"><u></u> <u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">You didn’t even deign to read them, and brushed them off altogether, pretending they were basically WBTs.<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">Boiling water in a protocol doesn’t mean the protocol is a Water Boiling Test.<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4"><u></u> <u></u></font></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">So, could you please answer or try to answer my questions, recapitulated below:</font><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>1.<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Is the WBT valuable to you because the TLUD shine at it and it has tier rankings, who are the right way to proceed with stove improvement?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>2.<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">What do you think of Lombardi and al. analysis that tier rankings may not be reliable?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>3.<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Who are the ”experts” advocating continued use of the WBT?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>4.<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Who are the ”experts” who believe that the WBT is critical to stove improvement?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>5.<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">What is so unique about the WBT that cannot be done by the CSI nor HTP?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span style="font-size:12pt"><u></u> </span><u></u></span></p>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><font size="4">Thank you,<u></u><u></u></font></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-MsoNormal"><font size="4"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><br>
Xavier</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="m_-7625408531123022934gmail-m_-5419141981454184397DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><font size="4"> </font></div>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>