[Stoves] Emissions from Residential Wood

[Richard Stanley]

I agree with you Steve and I feel that the issue of local versus  
regional or global sourcing goes way beyond that...
In the development arena as I've experienced it over the past 34 odd  
years,  it seems that "development" it is as much about capacity  
building, job creation, and income generation as it is about  
pollution reduction and fuel/stove  optimisation.

Indeed Shell (now nicely equipped with countless hours of the free  
input of dozens on this and other lists, in the guise of preparing  
their grant outlines) and Phillips can, no doubt, produce highly  
efficient stoves and perhaps they have the means to distribute them  
effectively.

But then what in the real impact and benefit ?

What real learning is taking place; What skills are being developed,  
What incomes are generated (& for whom); and What confidence and  
pride emerges as a result of the emergence of hundreds of locally  
owned private industries responding to / working within their own  
local communities.

Put a Kilowatt energy in--energy out factor on that gang, and it  
seems to me that we would really be on the right track...
Richard Stanley
www.legacyfound.org



On Jan 4, 2007, at 02:34, Steve Redmond wrote:

> "I can't see what this accomplishes. I think it merely complicates  
> things.
> Why is it important to the consumer to know how much energy was  
> required to
> dry, transport, and store the fuel?"
>
> Well it would only be important to consumers who were concerned  
> with things
> like global warming and long distance pollution, etc.and their  
> personal
> contribution to it. It might make a better basis for a decision when
> purchasing and installing say a furnace which commits them to a  
> specific
> fuel for ten to twenty years. It might also raise consciousness  
> about the
> wider contributory factors in these problems.
>
> True, the fuel makers could also label for things like their brand  
> level of
> embodied energy -- it might make a good way to gain consumer  
> preference. It
> might then also affect distribution patterns of fuels in a more  
> positive and
> logical way. Advertising mileage could be had from an especially low
> embodied energy and pollution rating.
>
> It might also make a difference to EPA test results if the true  
> overall
> contribution to air pollution was determined for a particular furnace,
> rather than simply the proximal one..
>
> Using the present approach, a highly refined converted liquid fuel,  
> labeled
> as an alternative ecologically responsible innovation, packaged in  
> a fossil
> fuel based plastic quart bottle, cased in attractive carton,   
> transported
> long distances by truck, burned in a highly complex furnace  
> manufactured
> from exotic materials might give a wonderfully low stack emission  
> sample and
> high level of efficiecy. Five stars on the EPA test scale.  
> Meanwhile 2000
> miles of truck exhaust are settling on the highways that directed  
> it to that
> furnace.
>
> An exaggeration of course. But shouldn't we have some accounting of  
> a larger
> efficiency? It would be nice if the information was actually  
> available to
> let the market decide to act in its own ultimate interest, if it so  
> chose.
> That seems an even more effective way of making change than by merely
> enforcing standards that don't bear a realistic relation to the larger
> picture.
>
> I hadn't thought this would actually come to pass, in mentioning it  
> however.
>
> --Steve
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stoves mailing list
> Stoves at listserv.repp.org
> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_listserv.repp.org
> http://www.bioenergylists.org
>