Great conversation. Thanks Paul for coming up with a great list. Since I will not be able to attend the Forum I just wanted to address item #6 here. I have to agree with Paul on this one. How do we hope to progress as a community if we are not sharing our results with each other? I understand how much is put into a design, but if the ultimate goal is for health and environment we need to make an extra effort to share these results with the community. If you are an NGO or a social enterprise looking to compare stove performance in order to decide which stove to distribute, it makes it difficult to make a decision without that kind of transparency. We should push for greater transparency in sharing results and let the results speak for themselves.
Best, Christina On Mar 11, 2013, at 9:29 AM, Ranyee Chiang <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Paul and all, > > Thanks for your message and your suggestions. Since your message is > organized nicely into a list, I'll address things from the Global Alliance's > perspective one by one. In general, these issues are on the agenda, but they > also take effort and time so they are still in progress. > > As we gather in 8 days in Cambodia for the GACC Forum, and with all of the > Testing Centers represented there, here are some questions (and comments and > requests) that I hope are addressed. In short, stove testing issues are not > just about protocols. It is also about the realities of getting tests done. > > Agreed! We have a number of different types of activities focused beyond > protocols. The recent Request for Proposals was to support testing centers > to improve their ability to get tests done. Also, we recently organized a > training workshop focused on laboratory setup, management, and quality > assurance at the EPA Cookstoves Testing Center, issues that are relevant > regardless of whatever protocol is used. Here’s a summary of this workshop, > and we plan to continue these training/discussion workshops. And I think > most importantly, one of our top goals for the immediate future is to help > bring producers and testing center staff together to discuss how to improve > the partnerships. For those of you at the Clean Cooking Forum in Cambodia, I > encourage you to join the session on Wednesday morning – Roundtable for > Producers and Regional Testing and Knowledge Centers. The goal of this > session will be to discuss many of the issues that have been raised here. We > will also be capturing notes from that discussion to share with others who > will not be able to join in person. > > 0. Preface: Let's start with positive recognition of the GACC and the > associated Testing Centers and their leaders for all of the hard work that is > being done about stove testing. THANK YOU!!! We know that many issues > remain un-resolved. But perhaps the questions below can be answered. > > We’ve been able to do so much because it is a collaborative team effort with > partners of the Global Alliance. We are taking things one step at a time, so > I think we all agree that the hard work will have to continue! > > 1. Please provide a full listing of ALL of the Test Centers, with > indication of what testing (efficiencies, CO, PM, safety, etc) each one > actually can conduct. It is hard to imagine that this does not already > exist, so really I am asking for a URL link if it exists. But this is just > the starting point. > > 2. What is the cost (the price, the charges) for having each of those > tests done at each Testing Center? Estimates and ranges of fees are > accepted information. These Centers are to be independent of the companies > that make stoves, and they are financially assisted by the GACC. So who > charges what prices? Is there competitive bidding? Or > are prices fixed by whom? > > The listing of the Regional Testing and Knowledge Centers that were selected > through the Global Alliance Request for Proposals is prepared and is in the > queue to be posted on our website > (http://www.cleancookstoves.org/funding-opportunities/awardees.html). > Another item in the queue to is a larger listing of testing centers that will > be in a dedicated Standards and Testing section of the website. We are in > the middle of staffing changes for website development, so we appreciate your > patience on this. But these items are on the way. These lists will link to > partner profiles in the online directory, and thanks for your feedback on the > types of information that are useful to include here. > > The Global Alliance is working with the centers so that they can communicate > their available services and fee structure with organizations and potential > clients. Right now, we are focusing on ramping up capacity and getting > feedback from these organizations about what services are needed (for > example, at the Wednesday morning discussion at the Forum). And the testing > centers are developing and updating their services menu and fees based on > this feedback, and I’m sure they will be happy to share this information with > potential clients. > > 3. [ ALSO it would be interesting to know how many tests of which types are > actually conducted at each Center in 1 month or 6 months or yearly, but that > is perhaps prying too much into the operations of the > Centers. Maybe one or two centers could give us those numbers. But I > suspect that the GACC that is financing these Centers should require at > least that much accountability from each Center. If so, then perhaps > some averages or ranges of numbers could be shared, without naming the > Centers. ] > > As part of the annual partner reporting (the online form will be released at > the Forum), all testing centers will be asked to submit this type of > information. Each type of partner organization will have questions tailored > to the work that they are focused on, and the Alliance will be sharing the > aggregate data. > > 4. And what arrangements are possible to have financial assistance to those > of us who would like to have stoves "tested" informally (to learn about how > to improve the stove) and formally (to have results that can be > published.)?? Without financial assistance (as in a subsidy via the Testing > Center that has GACC assistance), the little guys will not afford the test > costs, and the big operations (and recipients of grants) will. > > We are eventually aiming for a sustainable testing market, with clients > receiving services that add value to their organization and testing centers > being supported for their work. We have been able to support some testing > centers so that they are able to reduce their costs, which will translate > into lower fees for clients, especially in the shorter term. There may be > some other donor organizations or investors who will be interested in > supporting testing. But with the overall aim of having a sustainable testing > market, our major focus is on making sure that testing centers are providing > services that will be of value to clients (improving product, marketing to > investors or consumer, etc). > > 5. Because of the appropriate objectives of independent testing, and the > need for replication testing in multiple Test Centers, the costs will > escalate. What assistance is being arranged for this? NOTE: > Everyone wants his/her stove tested by Jim Jetter of the EPA. This is > becoming the "diamond standard". Great. But only if the stove gets > accepted into the group to be tested, and then the results take 1 to 2 years > to be released because it is such a massive task for one place to accomplish. > ... > > One of the goals of the network of testing centers is to build up the quality > and reliability of testing at multiple centers and also ensure that results > are comparable from center to center. We are in the middle of working on > this goal, and we eventually hope to have multiple testing centers where each > one can provide quality and trusted results. > > 6. Meanwhile, where are any results from the other Testing Centers? > Very few and far between. Why? Partly because when a person or > company pays to have a stove tested (seems to be in most cases except via Jim > Jetter and sometimes via CSU with funding for testing), the > stove owner controls the results. And it seems that almost all of the > owners are not sharing their results. We can say "That's business." > But were is the progress? So if the GACC financially assists (supports) the > Testing Centers, and especially if "subsidized testing" can be offered, then > there could be requirements that the Testing Centers could > release some or all of those results. Perhaps the stove name and the > maker name are not released. But at least we could know about Rockets > and TLUDs and charcoal and "fan-forced" and simple bucket-stoves and etc. > Perhaps with some further subdivisions so that, for example, poor charcoal > stoves and the advanced/improved charcoal stoves are not lumped > into one category. And encourage the stove maker to agree to have the > actual stove named if the stove is somewhat reasonable or representative. > > For an organization that is testing as part of the product development > process, we’re going with the standard practice for those results to be kept > confidential if that is what the organization prefers. I think we have a > fair amount of agreement that if an organization would like to report IWA > tiers for their technology, that the testing results are shared publicly. We > can’t change the IWA, but we are building on it to ensure that the sector has > consistent, independent, and verified reporting, and these discussions will > also continue through formal standards discussions. We see the Stove > Performance Inventory as the place to consolidate and share testing results. > We are making plans for an online user-friendly version of this Inventory, > and we are also developing plans to add new testing data. We are considering > the option of anonymized data, but we still need to work out as a community > what manufacturers might be willing to share and what level of data is useful > for the sector. > > For those of you heading to Phnom Penh, see you there! And for others, we’ll > keep you updated about the progress that we make! > > Cheers, > Ranyee > _______________________________________________ > Stoves mailing list > > to Send a Message to the list, use the email address > [email protected] > > 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/ >
_______________________________________________ Stoves mailing list to Send a Message to the list, use the email address [email protected] 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/
