Dear Jock
Thank you for point out that cherry picking a few items from the whole data is not a valid way of looking at the problem. The stoves and fuel are consumed in a matrix of economic and social circumstances. Funding or subsidies has a tendency to skew rational decision processes by focussing on particular aspects of a technology or crop (for example maize production for biofuels has an impact on food prices). I thank you for keeping this at the forefront. Regards Crispin Crispin, On May 29, 2013, at 5:32 AM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: The viability of cooking while making char pivots on two things: the conversion of fuel to char without increasing the raw fuel demand, and the rate of positive return on char placed in the soil. The data that addresses these issues is of great interest to me. Holding back carbon from combustion will increase the feedstock demand. This is a non issue if the feedstock is free, or, even better, a waste stream with a disposal cost that can now be avoided. Of course an increase in garden productivity, or a sufficient market value for the charcoal, could eliminate any extra cost even if the feedstock has to be purchased. And all this with no credit for sequestering carbon. In sum, the entire value chain has to be taken into account, not simply a few cherry picked data points such as the increase in feedstock required. Regards, Jock
_______________________________________________ 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/
