Crispin,
Good examples and great ideas. Thanks Tom From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Crispin Pemberton-Pigott Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 2:01 PM To: 'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves' Subject: Re: [Stoves] Testing and Development Laboratories Dear Tom We need a bigger testing footprint. Many many stove are promoted without people have a real clue as to their fuel saving or emissions profile and the reason is primarily no access to any testing or the testing was not relevant, not even to mention its accuracy. >The reason for asking is that one way to stimulate stove improvement might be enable producers to access and get support from labs. I believe the progress made by John Davies, on his own, was in good measure because real time testing could show him what was and was not better, sifting through his hunches about how things should work. Maybe he can support that. It certainly helped me. I was stuck in 'visual land' until I was handed a small combustion analyser. >I have seen situations where a design gets "stuck" without being further developed due to lack of technical support. That support is the sort of thing you get at the SEET lab: bring it I, make it perform, we will let you know what we think would make it better, then demonstrate it to convince you. Emissions reductions by a factor of 10 are routine with this method. >Organizations involved in production and dissemination often don't have the appropriate resources. It is a good use of Global Alliance funds because perhaps 100 new products are needed. >What would labs need funding support for? Equipment? Personnel? Conducting tests, design and development? Or all of these? All those and post-grads. I have been trying to get 5 physics students into the SEET lab for more than a year with no success. No one will look ahead 5 years to the time when we need a new coterie of people skilled at testing and familiar with the issues of standard setting and certification (implying legislation and inspection). Design and Development has to be backed up by access to real time emissions and thermal efficiency testing. The task-based approach often used till now hides too many thing and can waste a great deal of effort. Take a look at the attached charts. There is only one small difference between these two tests (same stove) something detected in a real time examination of the emissions. Regards Crispin
_______________________________________________ Stoves mailing list to Send a Message to the list, use the email address Stoves mailing list 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://www.bioenergylists.org/ [email protected] http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
