Paul, 

Hoping this gets through the filters of this group, you nicely describe the 
very philosophical differences I have with the centralize and mass produce 
movement at least for these technologies; We have had major success self 
sustaining success at that but by the very nature of it the centralized worlds 
access to it, such access tends to consume it to little beneficial end for the 
local producer/trainer. 

The whole idea of development surely cannot be to simply replicate our western 
industrialized model of development on the global community. It's a model that 
you in your own profession well know has serious distortions to the global 
economy given for example, our resource consumption patterns as against our 
proportion of the world's population, and the mere carbon footprint we make in 
trying to extoll the virtues of centralized mass production and distribution 
---where such technologies as these can be managed at the local level. 

It's certainly agreed that  pure localized one-off initiatives are labor 
intensive to say the least and so much is lost in the process, as the learning 
is not generally transferred by the trainees-trained as trainers, to emerging 
groups in their own area. 

To me, its is not about "centralization" but about localization of initiative 
and responsibility and localization of reward--globally. Its about functioning 
as a mechanic of the process, to encourage this to happen in such a way as to 
assure local responsibility and initiative.  The process is monetised to assure 
self sustained participation . Everyone works at risk and reward and 
responsibility locally but the participants also learn to  share their findings 
globally 

And for 2014 as initially suggested by many colleagues, we are bent on 
assembling  an anthology on the subject by those who have been directly 
involved in it.

Knowing we all share the same end goals, all the best to you and the other many 
good like minds for the new year. 

Richard Stanley
www.legacyfound.org  


 
=============
On Dec 31, 2013, at 3:34 PM, Paul Anderson wrote:

Dear ', and all,

As much as I can agree with Paal's statements, but I think the cards are 
stacked against the success of decentralized efforts.

The issue that Paal raises about the need to have decentralized production of 
stoves (and fuels) is a touchy topic because the "model" of the affluent world 
is for centralized industrial production.   That centralized model is certainly 
a cornerstone of the GACC  and WB and many who feel that the model of the 
affluent world will work to resolve major issues in the developing world. And 
they control access to most of the funding.   And they present very convincing 
arguments.   (If they could not, they would not be in control of the situation.)

It would be good to have some examples of decentralized efforts having major 
impacts.   Maybe the spread of the Kenyan ceramic jiko (KCJ) is one example.

I will be at ETHOS and willing for such discussions if others step forward 
wanting to discuss this informally as an ad hoc sub-group.

Paul

Doc  /  Dr TLUD  /  Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email:  [email protected]
Skype: paultlud      Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website:  www.drtlud.com

On 12/31/2013 10:15 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 08:12:54 -0700,
> [email protected] wrote:
> 
>> Due to health and age it will not be possible for me to participate, but 
>> after 30 years working with task and followed the discussion at Stove list I 
>> have come to this conclusion.
>> 
>> There has to be a discussion at ETHOS about centralized or decentralized 
>> activities regarding fuel and stove production with a view on the enormous 
>> unemployment in developing countries. Taken into consideration the high 
>> demands of clean combustion, pellets will be the future biomass fuel for 
>> simple clean burning such as TLUD ND and FD. Energy forestry and agriculture 
>> energy production together collection of waste biomass of different types 
>> will give a lot of new needed jobs.
>> 
>> ·         Registration of local waste combustible biomass.
>> 
>> ·         Use of local resources
>> 
>> ·         Biochar production by cooking.
>> 
>> That will be the best way for GACC Stove program to support the low income 
>> groups all around the worl
>> 
>> Best regards Paal Wendelbo [email protected]
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
> 


_______________________________________________
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/



_______________________________________________
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/

Reply via email to