<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: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)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@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:Georgia;
panose-1:2 4 5 2 5 4 5 2 3 3;}
/* 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;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page Section1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</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=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Dear Nikhil,<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'>The CSI or WHT measure the qualities of the cooking system, and
that includes the stove itself (and the vessel).<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'>Reliability is nothing more than that: « if I test this
stove, within this cooking system « stove + user + vessel + fuel +
food », can I trust the lab results to give me good indication on how the
stove will operate in real life, with a similar cooking system »?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>That’s the minimum requirement.<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'>« </span></i><i><span style='font-size:9.5pt'>it is the
overall economy of cooking »<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Sure, it is this economy which is often difficult to predict and
improve i.e. the stove which saves fuel in the lab and wastes fuel in the
kitchen.<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:9.5pt'>« who cares about
performance metrics and tiers that you and Crispin, along with many others,
signed off on six or more years ago (Hague or Lima)? »<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>No one. But everyone cares about what these performance metrics
translate. Even the user: « my stove cooks faster, it’s great to prepare
breakfast in the morning. » « I need to fetch twice less wood or buy
twice less charcoal », « I cough less » etc.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.5pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>« A repeat plea - listen to the cooks who cook meals,
not numbers. »<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Listening to cooks is what everyone does or tries to do. The hardest
part is what comes after. It is easy to say « listen to cooks », but
how do you design a stove from there?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Your future customer will say: « I want my new stove to be
quicker than my mud stove, with no smoke. I want it to allow to cook big or
small quantity of food, and to save wood ».<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Once you have listened to a cook, how do you design a stove from
there?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Have you already tried to design, build, test, improve a stove
Nikhil?<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 don’t see how a stove can be designed with no numbers and only
a wet finger.<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'>To test the stove with a wok, there are the CCT and KPT.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>In the lab, the WHT and CSI approach seem to make much more
sense to me. The customer needs can translate in numbers. You need to cook rice
and dhal? But how does it translate in terms of time, power to the pot?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>If you say: « I want my smartphone to be responsive and
powerful », this translates to numbers for the engineers in the lab. But,
of course, you will submit the target-customer to your product, to the
experience of it, so he/can can tell you how he/she feels, how the product
feels.<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:9.5pt'>"How about looking
into some more versatile tests that are not limited to a pot of water.
How would we test the efficiency of getting the heat into a wok being used for
stir frying? Perhaps we could use an infrared thermometer to measure the
temperature of the food and end the test when it all reaches a temperature that
kills bacteria. How about testing the stove and the cooking vessel
separately, so each has its own values? That would give the consumer a
much better preview of both, and more knowledge to pick and choose."<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Sure, and it has been said many times that new protocols, more
adapted, should be developed if someone feels it is needed.<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 tried the CSI and WHT to test a stove + wok used for
stir frying, and you think it is not adapted?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Tell exactly what is not adapted, how it could be better,
develop your own protocol, and submit it to peer review.<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,<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Xavier<br>
<br>
<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 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"'> Nikhil Desai
[mailto:pienergy2008@gmail.com] <br>
<b>Envoyé :</b> mercredi 18 juillet 2018 01:56<br>
<b>À :</b> Xavier Brandao<br>
<b>Cc :</b> Discussion of biomass cooking stoves; Paul Anderson; Kirk H.;
Crispin Pemberton-Pigott<br>
<b>Objet :</b> Re: [Stoves] TLUD stoves and tests<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Xavier:<br>
<br>
Nicely put. <br>
<br>
The way I read Kirk H., his complaint is that "<span style='font-size:
9.5pt'>these cooking vessel tests .. do not measure the qualities of the stove
itself."<br>
<br>
You and Crispin seem to be obsessed with "reliability". Of
course, reproducibility is a hallmark of science. But my question is,
"reliability" of what and why?<br>
<br>
There is no reason to worry about fuel or thermal efficiency per se; it is the
overall economy of cooking - which no doubt includes costs of food ingredients,
water, fuel, vessels, stove, time - that even a supposedly illiterate woman
understands and tries to obtain. <br>
<br>
Equally, there is no reason to worry about per minute emission rates unless
they are shown to predictably affect exposures, not computed fantasies of air
circulation models for closed spaces, one room or two or three. <br>
<br>
So, except for CDM and Gold Standard who rely on fictional CO2 avoidance (and
ignore health pollutants), or marketers of HAPIT, who cares about performance
metrics and tiers that you and Crispin, along with many others, signed off on
six or more years ago (Hague or Lima)?<br>
<br>
In that sense, I think Kirk H. has advanced a most valuable and succinct
suggestion, even keeping efficiency as a metric - <br>
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial'><span
style='font-size:9.5pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<blockquote style='margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<blockquote style='margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial'><span
style='font-size:9.5pt'>"How about looking into some more versatile tests
that are not limited to a pot of water. How would we test the efficiency
of getting the heat into a wok being used for stir frying? Perhaps we
could use an infrared thermometer to measure the temperature of the food and
end the test when it all reaches a temperature that kills bacteria. How
about testing the stove and the cooking vessel separately, so each has its own
values? That would give the consumer a much better preview of both, and
more knowledge to pick and choose."<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><br>
Amen. This is complicated but a step toward realism. Different fuels and meals
can provide additional variation. <br>
<br>
The ProPublica piece is junk journalism, another trip report from poverty
tourism. I think a new thinking can start with a modest acknowledgement that a
cookstove is for cooking, that performance metrics may only be defined in the
context of a"service standard" (actions such as boil, steam, wok fry,
deep fry, roast, and major meal types that cover most of these actions and
employ different vessels) and of public policy (i.e., non-cooking - e.g., air quality
improvement).<br>
<br>
A repeat plea - listen to the cooks who cook meals, not numbers.<br>
<br>
Reading the Indonesia pilot report yesterday, I remember an analogy with
Indonesia Solar Home Systems project, which became a template for many other
SHS projects. For bulk procurement under the rules of competitive bidding,
entire systems were specified; this led to one disaster after another. Under
the SHS projects, components had to comply with standards, but retailers were
free to design the 35Wp, 50Wp SHS and after-sales service pitch customized to
their target customers.<br>
<br>
Just maybe, this Indonesia cookstove pilot has created a template to promote
customer-centric design and subsidy scheme unlike anything EPA had in mind in
setting off the ISO exercise. <br>
<br>
Nikhil<br>
<br>
<br clear=all>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Georgia","serif"'>------------------------------------------------------------------------</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-family:"Georgia","serif"'>(US
+1) 202 568 5831<br>
<i>Skype: nikhildesai888</i></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>