I am sending to my co-worker, MB, in India this message, and I will relay to you the results. He is not subscribed to the Stoves Listserv, and it is my role to deal with these messages.
Meanwhile, I respond below to your comments and questions.
DM5PR2201MB149951C956A603AF9CEF95E3B1410@DM5PR2201MB1499.namprd22.prod.outlook.com” type=”cite”>
Dear Paul You are hitting the right nails on their heads.1. Very poor people living in eastern Darjeeling Districe, West Bengal, India are eagarly accepting the Champion TLUD stoves, with a waiting list for each new batch. And there are 12,000 of those same stoves in constant use in Deganga, WB, for up to 4 years.That is great news. I would appreciate the economics of the stove (not the fuel part, the stove cost) to be shared. It is very important to have understood that because a stove does something people want, they will find the money to buy it. People are paying $100 in Uganda to get a Biolite stove so as to generate a small amount of electricity. Why? Because it does something they want.
The stove economics are explained in the document www.drtlud.com/deganga2016 . Deganga is in West Bengal, India, as are the other pilot areas (eastern Darjeeling and Uluberia) where my team has active TLUD projects. Collectively, these are the West Bengal TLUD stove projects. Please note that I do not have any administrative or financial involvement in the Deganga area. As stated in the document, the Germany-based carbon-credit entity “atmosfair” is the financial sponsor of the Deganga activities.
DM5PR2201MB149951C956A603AF9CEF95E3B1410@DM5PR2201MB1499.namprd22.prod.outlook.com” type=”cite”>
BTW I have a report from Sujatha that about 60% of the fuel being burned to make charcoal to sell is not waste from factories, it is regular wood. Early on I heard it was furniture waste. This is an important thing to track.
Also in the Deganga report are statements that the fuel wood comes mainly from trimmings from mango plantations and sustainable forestry in West Bengal.
DM5PR2201MB149951C956A603AF9CEF95E3B1410@DM5PR2201MB1499.namprd22.prod.outlook.com” type=”cite”>
>It seems that much of the rejection is by Westerners who believe they know what the poor people think and want. Time will tell. Rejection by whom? Who rejects TLUD's? Not me. I design and promote them and teach the building of them. In two weeks I will be checking on customer comments to see how they can be improved.
Good. I am counting on you and others to be strongly supportive that TLUD stoves be much more actively included in crucial pilot studies and testing and for receiving institutional support. So far there is no support for the Darjeeling and Uluberia efforts except from MB, myself, and small loans. (Potential supporters should contact me directly at psanders@ilstu.edu . I am preparing explanatory documentation as fast as I can.)
DM5PR2201MB149951C956A603AF9CEF95E3B1410@DM5PR2201MB1499.namprd22.prod.outlook.com” type=”cite”>
2. The calculations of the fuel use reduction for the same cooking tasks in Deganga were measured with a scale in the field in Deganga. Average usage of nearly 9 kg went down to about 4 kg. I call that better than 50%. AND the families are selling their charcoal for important monthly income.If it was a direct measurement that is a credible and excellent result. You may remember a discussion we had, with calculations, which showed how high the heat transfer efficiency would have to be to reduce the fuel consumption while simultaneously producing a portion of charcoal from the fuel consumed. If you were able to get some fuel mass, moisture contents, char mass and energy value numbers it could be published showing where the fuel and energy goes.
While I respect the request for doing more measurements and more measurements and more measurements, MB and I will not be diverting our attention from our ongoing efforts in eastern Darjeeling and Uluberia. We would welcome the financial support from any source to pay for the measurements that you are requesting. The data about Deganga belongs to atmosfair.
DM5PR2201MB149951C956A603AF9CEF95E3B1410@DM5PR2201MB1499.namprd22.prod.outlook.com” type=”cite”>
The value of this is to provide targets for performance. Out of that may come some sensible rules for reporting the performance of such stoves, and of course the fuel consumption.No WBT involved.If so that is why you are getting realistic numbers. Actual consumption, actual char yield, actual cooking. If you have some numbers for masses, we could show the value/mass chain without additional study. Do you know the details of the measurement method?
Answered above. Deganga data belongs to atmosfair. Data from eastern Darjeeling and Uluberia will be forthcoming as soon as we have further financial backing or at the end of the first year of carbon credit certification.
DM5PR2201MB149951C956A603AF9CEF95E3B1410@DM5PR2201MB1499.namprd22.prod.outlook.com” type=”cite”>
Deganga TLUD usage has been verified for each of the past four years by third-party examiners for the carbon credits. ---- There is no reason to be knocking the TLUDs because of calculation issues regarding the WBT.Well, do you realise how rare this is? I am not knocking TLUD's. I keep saying that, I am knocking the incorrect rating of stoves using the WBT. Obviously that goes for any similar calculation that under-reports fuel consumption. You are reporting the actual consumption based on the mass of fuel measured, right? Was that made using a CCT or KPT?
I do not have the details. What was done was sufficient for Gold Standard VER carbon credits certifications for the past 4 years.
DM5PR2201MB149951C956A603AF9CEF95E3B1410@DM5PR2201MB1499.namprd22.prod.outlook.com” type=”cite”>
Were you aware that there are CDM calculations that 'credit the energy content of the char' by deducting it from the denominator? Are you sure they are not doing that?
I do not know.
DM5PR2201MB149951C956A603AF9CEF95E3B1410@DM5PR2201MB1499.namprd22.prod.outlook.com” type=”cite”>
I know that you have a long-standing interest in getting the right answer, not necessarily a convenient one. When you cite the fuel consumption above you mention both field measurements AND the CDM, is that from a CDM assessment based on the methods listed on their website, or was is based on measurements of fuel mass entering the home?
I do not know.
DM5PR2201MB149951C956A603AF9CEF95E3B1410@DM5PR2201MB1499.namprd22.prod.outlook.com” type=”cite”>
A quick way to check is if the mass of fuel consumed is claimed to be 4 kg, and the production of char is X grams, and the cooking efficiency is known. You have been the most forthcoming member of the list when it comes to sharing raw data from char making stoves. Can you share the documentation for the CDM determinations? That would be really helpful in demonstrating how the stoves and the income stream functions.
I do not know of any CDM-related efforts that provide that documentation. But my awareness of those efforts is quite limitd. Perhaps others on this Stove Listserv might have such data.
Paul
DM5PR2201MB149951C956A603AF9CEF95E3B1410@DM5PR2201MB1499.namprd22.prod.outlook.com” type=”cite”>
Thanks for inspiration Crispin _______________________________________________ Stoves mailing list to Send a Message to the list, use the email address stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site: http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/