<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Texte de bulles Car";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.apple-tab-span
{mso-style-name:apple-tab-span;}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.TextedebullesCar
{mso-style-name:"Texte de bulles Car";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Texte de bulles";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1030178779;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-753115748 67895297 67895299 67895301 67895297 67895299 67895301 67895297 67895299 67895301;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:2005234593;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:1306984310 67895297 67895299 67895301 67895297 67895299 67895301 67895297 67895299 67895301;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=FR link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Dear Ron,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>You have gone pretty far in the past with fallacious reasoning, but this email takes the cake. We are now in uncharted territory.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Basically, this is your whole argumentation here:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>"I say they are valid because they are so widely used"<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Ron, please re-read 7 times this sentence out loud just to measure how ridiculous it is.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I'll tell you other things people widely do:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:#1F497D'><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>·<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>People widely eat McDonalds<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:#1F497D'><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>·<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>People widely believe in sorcery and spirits<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:#1F497D'><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>·<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>People widely believe in different kind of gods<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:#1F497D'><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>·<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>People widely believed the sun was rotating around the Earth<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>So many people can't be wrong, ain't it?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>How are people supposed to know how the WBT works? How are they supposed to know that it is not reliable?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Those who advocate(d) for the WBT while aware of the issues are responsible of this state of affairs.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I'll tell you what happened. A group of people invented the WBT. There was nothing at the time, some protocol had to be created and used. It's perfectly fine. Then more people started to use it. Without reviewing it. Testing reports started to pile. At some point, a few studies started to be published pointing at some serious flaws in the WBT. No one bothered about that, the WBT continued to be used, reports kept piling. Then more studies, on other issues, were published. Still no one was taking action. Sunk cost. The further you go, the more difficult it is to go back. The WBT has never been reviewed, except by the studies I was mentioning, and they all say there are serious problems with it.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>« I respond because I find your position on the WBT to be devoid of value. »<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Why? Please explain.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>« There are hundreds of articles using the WBT, with no issue of its validity. »<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Of course, they have never studied the WBT, never reviewed it! They have been told to use the WBT, so they tested, and they reported. The WBT was supposed to have had the state-of-the-art research and updates, why would they not use it?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>« I know of no article in a peer-reviewed technical journal that gives a rationale for WBT or DE’s discontinuation. The topic seems unique to this list »<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>If something is not in a peer-reviewed technical journal, it doesn’t exist?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>There is a serious rationale explaining the problems and why the WBT is broken. The peer-reviewed articles explain why it is not reliable.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>There is one little more step to take, and this step, researchers are not willing to take it. Because it is not their job, or so they think. Scientists usually think their role is to state facts. From facts, conclusions and actions can be taken.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>This step is left to political actors, NGOs like Winrock, international organizations like GACC, implementers, or activists.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>« I say misinformed because both Professor Phillip Lloyd and Crispin showed a few months ago they did not know how to use the DE, (Dr. Lloyd pulled an arbitrary number out of the air in his use of the equation). »<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>How so? How should the DE be used then?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>You talk a lot about the Denominator Equation, but to me, it is another matter. I don’t have an opinion about it, and I haven’t seen convincing facts from you who put into question what Tami and Crispin said.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>You can continue the conversation about the DE with them, but whether the DE is valid or not has no impact on all the other questions about the unreliability of the WBT.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>With or without the DE, the WBT is unreliable.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>« It is argued (by those especially who don’t have one) that stove testing laboratories (the main users of the WBT) are unnecessary. »<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Who said that? Certainly not me nor the proponents of alternative testing. Laboratory testing is useful, and laboratories are useful. The WBT is not. CSI and HTP are laboratory protocols. You refused to read these protocols.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>« It is true that I argue for the WBT because char-making stoves turn out well using the DE. Exceedingly well. »<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Not sure this in a paper would pass the peer-reviewing ...<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>« It seems that those who argue against the WBT and DE are associated with stoves that don’t do as well. »<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Who then? Give names. Stop just making allegations.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>« I do so now for climate reasons (earlier for forest preservation, health, time-saving and money-making reasons). My experience on this list is that a large majority of those who put down the WBT and the DE have zero concern about the climate impacts of inefficient and polluting stoves (and especially charcoal-using stoves). Such beliefs lack appreciation of climate science; those persons must also have other motives - probably money related. »<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Please say who are those persons and what are those other motives? Do you have facts corroborating that?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>« This list has finally had this week a TLUD story from Bangladesh that fully justifies use of the WBT and DE. »<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>How? Can you explain?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I’ll tell you something Ron, just to make things very clear:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2'><![if !supportLists]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:#1F497D'><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>·<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I think the TLUD technology is by far the most exciting and promising stove technology right now, and that includes the char-making stoves<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2'><![if !supportLists]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:#1F497D'><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>·<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I think that anthropogenic climate change is real, and that it is one of the main threats for the humanity and other living species on this planet<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>All that is beyond the point.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>We are now talking about the WBT, and there are scientific facts showing it is unreliable, and so far you haven’t been able to reply to my questions, and to prove these facts wrong.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Ron, you are supposed to be a scientist, to have a critical mind, to judge on facts only, and not on trends nor emotions.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Please let’s discuss facts.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>This sentence: « they are valid because they are so widely used » would have founding fathers and mothers of science throw themselves out the window, if they could.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><br>Xavier<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>De :</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Ronal W. Larson [mailto:rongretlarson@comcast.net] <br><b>Envoyé :</b> samedi 9 décembre 2017 06:22<br><b>À :</b> Discussion of biomass; Xavier Brandao<br><b>Cc :</b> Nikhil Desai; Crispin Pemberton-Pigott; Paul Anderson; Julien Winter<br><b>Objet :</b> Re: [Stoves] Going back to 3-Stone Fire [Was Re: China and cookstoves]<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Xavier, list and ccs<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>I guess (being the only individual named) I have to take up the challenge. This is no fun. I respond because I find your position on the WBT to be devoid of value. I apologize for trying to get this out on the day you sent it - and it is late.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>My evidence on the validity of the present WBT (especially including the “denominator equation” - “DE” = e1/(1-e2) is below in several parts. If you respond, please refer to my numbered points, so we can best understand your reasoning. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Part I- the WBT and DE<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>a. There are hundreds of articles using the WBT, with no issue of its validity. Those that don’t use the DE also assume there is no char worth keeping track of. I don’t see how that can be a valid reason for not using a DE (and I think they all national stove documents use something like a WBT).<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>b. I know of no article in a peer-reviewed technical journal that gives a rationale for WBT or DE’s discontinuation. The topic seems unique to this list<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>c. Working group 2 of the of the ongoing ISO TC-285 process recently voted overwhelmingly to retain the “DE”. I am not aware of even unpublished critiques that make sense (and I ask for such to be part of your response).<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>d. Working group #1 had a very small group ( I’ve heard 7?) carry a virtual tie in saying that the DE should be removed. Last night, WG#1’s leader, Professor Tami Bond said I (nd others) could forward an explanatory private memo. Others can forward more, but I think these sentences are important re the WBT and DE<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>"<i>There is a current draft in Working Group 2 regarding controlled laboratory testing (it has a formal name that I can’t remember). Its product is under revision after responding to comments from national standard bodies, and has not been published yet. Some of its features have received some of the same criticisms as were provided on the WBT that is in wide public use, yet other contents are different, as happens through discussion.”</i><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>Dr. Bond is not here arguing for removal of the DE, but (unfortunately) there will be some confusion because of a very small number who are misinformed about the DE and voted in an irrational position that has benn rebutted by the vast majority of those involved in this ISO process.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>e. I say misinformed because both Professor Phillip Lloyd and Crispin showed a few months ago they did not know how to use the DE, (Dr. Lloyd pulled an arbitrary number out of the air in his use of the equation).<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>f. It is argued (by those especially who don’t have one) that stove testing laboratories (the main users of the WBT) are unnecessary. They mostly also seem to couple the WBT with un-needed procedures for CO and particulates (because they don’t believe widely reported health statistics). I say they are valid because they are so widely used. Often used to save governments money (unhealthy citizens are drains on national economies). These rejections of the utility of pollutant measurements are almost identical to efforts to downplay climate impacts - caused by pollutants.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>g. Something like the WBT is used virtually everywhere. The only places where I believe the DE is not used is where they have not considered char-making to be possible or intelligent or some other unfathomable reason. I challenge anyone who believes cha-making has the least bit of value to give some other means for bringing char-making into the valuation of a stove.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Part II. Tiers Turning to use of the DE as used in the tier structures (and I believe this is the main beef of those opposed to the WBT)<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>a. It is true that I argue for the WBT because char-making stoves turn out well using the DE. Exceedingly well. It seems that those who argue against the WBT and DE are associated with stoves that don’t do as well.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>b. I do so now for climate reasons (earlier for forest preservation, health, time-saving and money-making reasons). My experience on this list is that a large majority of those who put down the WBT and the DE have zero concern about the climate impacts of inefficient and polluting stoves (and especially charcoal-using stoves). Such beliefs lack appreciation of climate science; those persons must also have other motives - probably money related.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>c. I claim the Part I arguments justify its use and I am convinced the DE is totally valid (and can only be obtained through a WBT. So I ask all who respond to this to propose a better means of helping advance stove performance than the tier approach with its present use of the DE results. If not tiers, what?<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>d. This list has finally had this week a TLUD story from Bangladesh that fully justifies use of the WBT and DE. If the DE was dropped from the tier system (as some on this list have proposed), then the work of Julien and his collaborators would be much delayed. To the disadvantage of those finding a new source of added income.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>It’s late. I may have to add more - on Lima for instance.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Ron<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><i> </i><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Dec 8, 2017, at 2:54 PM, Xavier Brandao <<a href="mailto:xav.brandao@gmail.com">xav.brandao@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Hello Frank,<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Ahah, there is indeed a pattern, you might have noticed it is usually the following:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div style='margin-left:36.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:-18.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>1.</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Someone, usually Ron or a member of the GACC, EPA, Aprovecho, D-Lab or Winrock, innocently drops « WBT is a great protocol to make stove improvements » or « you know, there are many supporters of the WBT », somewhere in a post, a handbook or a toolkit<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div style='margin-left:36.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:-18.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>2.</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Then, some of us howls in indignation, especially me. I start to rant and sound like a broken record. Then I hand over, once again, the pile of evidence, and ask some very simple straightforward questions.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div style='margin-left:36.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:-18.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>3.</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Suddenly the one in 1. very kindly tells me, in a « ho-it-would-be-so-great-to-have-you-there » fashion, to:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div style='margin-left:53.4pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:-18.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>a.</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Join the ISO-TC 285 discussions<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div style='margin-left:53.4pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:-18.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>b.</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Join a certain conference in the United States<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div style='margin-left:53.4pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:-18.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>c.</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Or becomes suddenly completely mute<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div style='margin-left:.6pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Often it is a., b. then c.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div style='margin-left:36.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:-18.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>4.</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Then a few months pass by, and one beautiful day, we are back to step 1.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>At this point it’s not a rabbit hole, it’s more like a rabbit loop, a rabbit loophole.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'><br>Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Xavier<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>-----Message d'origine-----<br>De : Stoves [<a href="mailto:stoves-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org"><span style='color:purple'>mailto:stoves-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</span></a>] De la part de<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><a href="mailto:franke@cruzio.com"><span style='color:purple'>franke@cruzio.com</span></a><br>Envoyé : jeudi 7 décembre 2017 21:56<br>À :<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><a href="mailto:ndesai@alum.mit.edu"><span style='color:purple'>ndesai@alum.mit.edu</span></a><br>Cc : Crispin Pemberton-Pigott; Discussion of biomass cooking stoves<br>Objet : Re: [Stoves] Going back to 3-Stone Fire [Was Re: China and cookstoves]<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Dear Nikhil, Stovers,<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Always great news when we start a new year talking WBT. That because it means we are not still down some rabbit hole someone has sent us to wallow around for a few years on some useless idea only to come to the surface and find us where we started (NOWHERE). But now starting at NOWHERE we must be careful we are not diverted down another rabbit hole. Make sure all project proposals involve the 6-Box system or parts of it. That involves both Field and Lab work. Because that is the only way we get control over the variables and move forward. A lot of work needs be done.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Frank Shields<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas'>Gabilan Laboratory<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div id=DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><table class=MsoNormalTable border=1 cellpadding=0 style='border:none;border-top:solid #D3D4DE 1.0pt'><tr><td width=55 style='width:41.25pt;border:none;padding:13.5pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'><p class=MsoNormal><a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient" target="_blank"><span style='color:purple;text-decoration:none'><img border=0 width=46 height=29 id="_x0000_i1025" src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p></td><td width=470 style='width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:12.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='line-height:13.5pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#41424E'>Garanti sans virus.<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient" target="_blank"><span style='color:#4453EA'>www.avast.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p></td></tr></table></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'>_______________________________________________<br>Stoves mailing list<br><br>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br></span><a href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org"><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:purple'>stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org</span></a><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'><br><br>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<br></span><a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org"><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:purple'>http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org</span></a><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'><br><br>for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:<br></span><a href="http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/"><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:purple'>http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/</span></a><o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></body></html>