Dear Andrew P Good points. The stove community projects are not threatened by failure of the PV subsidies but they are certainly affected by the (looming?) collapse of the carbon trading market. A number of castles have been built in the air. Recent emphasis on the health aspects of smoke inhalation will probably provide a more grounded source of development revenue. The recent doubling of the estimated number of people who die from cooking fire smoke will probably enhance interest.
The programmatic problem I have encountered with this is that cleaning up indoor air can be done without improving the stoves at all - just piping it outside where 'dilution is the solution to pollution', to quote and EBRD consultant. Inventors want to create stoves, not just clean up the air. The fuel saving aspect of stoves will always remain a strong contender in the funding cycle because it is an easy sell. Certainly easier than resource creation and management. Better to whine over how little there is than to create more. I am not so sure how the broad translation of agriwastes into fuel is going to be viewed by the people who promote agriculture. The biodynamic and permaculture people would not like to see all the mulch and humus removed to be turned into cooked food - or char for that matter. I think they tend to see biogas as a way forward because they retain access to the minerals in a digestible form, as it were. Economically viable solutions are going to dominate, no matter what the flavor of the month. Regards Crispin ++++++++ Paul, Solar City does not exactly provide solar installation for free. They provide an option in which they will install a complete system with no money down, but it involves a long-term contract (purchase option after 5 years) in which the customer buys the electricity generated by the panels at a set price (I am guessing that option requires the existence, beyond federal subsidies, of state, local and utility subsidies for solar panel installation and solar generated electricity). I am not poo-pooing the idea. It is a sound model. It would be sounder if it did not rely on subsidies. Where there is a strong market for rice husk char and ash, I agree that such a model could be used to market char-producing stoves to provide energy to the customer in exchange for char and ash, and a fee, if needed. I truly hope you can convince someone to invest. _______________________________________________ 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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
