Re: Fw: "Worlds Fastest Stove" Contest

["Paul S. Anderson" <psanders@ilstu.edu>]

Stovers,

I can agree with ALL of the commentor.  Each makes valid points.  However:

1.  Remember the posting by someone about lighting charcoal briquettes in 
seconds with a hydrogen - oxygen "rocket blast".  THAT type of stuff is to 
be avoided, regardless of the speed.   So I propose that any valid stove 
must be able to use "commonly available" biomass fuels (probably already in 
the rules, I hope)   AND

2.  A valid stoves (AND their specific fuels used in the speed to boil 
test) are also able to prepare ANY (or 3 out of 5???) of several simple 
meal components, such as fry some eggs or brew tea or grill a burger or 
cook a pot of rice.  For this aspect of the stove contest, the timing to 
cook and the measuring of fuel amounts are to be reported but are NOT part 
of the contest judging.

Examples:

a.  Stove XYZ boils in 72 seconds but cannot fry eggs or any other 
cooking:  Thanks for the entry, but not valid.

b.  Stove ABC boils in 75 seconds and does 3 of the 5 cooking 
tests:  (valid entry, and the details of cooking are just for interest:
         1.  Fry 2 eggs in 3 minutes with xxxx of fuel
         2.  ......

This suggestion is JUST to keep us from going wildly down only the road to 
boil-speed.

Paul

At 12:26 AM 1/11/02 -0400, Kevin Chisholm wrote:
>Dear Richard
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "richard stanley" <legacyfound@hotmail.com>
>To: <stoves@crest.org>
>Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 11:18 PM
>Subject: Re: Fw: "Worlds Fastest Stove" Contest
>
>
> > Dear stovers,
> > Reading what Tom Reed and others have suggested about practical
>application
> > of the stove, may I suggest that we let the actual user be the judge of
>the
> > stove ?
>
>It is very important to distinguish between a "contest of speed" and "an
>evaluation of practicality.." What we ar proposing to undertake is a "speed
>contest", with no concern for practicality initially. We are not at all
>concerned with an "evaluation of practicality."
>
>  Either we are testing technologies for technical preformance or we
> > are testing for practicality. It is not that one cannot include the other,
>Actually, we are testing for neither. We are testing for only raw speed. If
>your litre boils faster than mine you win. Case closed.
>
> > It is about the choice of the direction we want to go with our efforts.
> >
>We ultimately want to elevate the status of stove science. A necessary step
>along the way is research. The "Fastest Stove Contest" will indeed
>contribute to Stove Science. These contests(and a number of them can be
>proposed) will stretch and expand the present limits of stove science. At
>the present, all too many people think it is an art.
>
> > We could for example select say five rural communities over latin america,
> > africa and asia for their diversity in cooking applications, yet
>similarity
> > of need for improved cookstoves.
> >
>Thats not a contest, but rather "field trials" or a "market survey."
>
> > Each stove would (perhaps on meeting basic technical criteria such as
> > discussed already) then be replicated 5 times and sent to the 5 different
> > communities under the direction of any one of the group who was  already
> > proximate to /familiar with the community.
>
>Who builds the first stove???? Who detrmines what the stove should be
>designed to do? Why would such a stove be any better than presently
>available stoves that were designed with our present stove designing
>paradigm? I would suggest that if we run a stove contest, such as the
>"Fastest Stove", there will be knowledge fallout that will lead to an
>improved stove design paradigm. The time to stage a Community Test would be
>after the "new generation" of stoves are available.
>
>   I would suggest we do not try to
> > tell the stove tester what to test for, or even what results we are
>looking
> > for, only that the testor use the stove and advise us in its usefulness
>and
> > how it might be improved as part of a joint effort.
>
>Our Contest has nothing to do with usefullness and practicality now.
>Beneficial fallout will come later.
>
>  We cannot easily apply
> > standarised pot sized or material types or barometric pressure but that is
> > really for us to determine not necessarily the actual user's concern.
> >
>To get some semblance of comparability, we must agree on some general rules
>for the contest.
>
> > This approach may provide some very interesting information. It would at
> > minimum provide fodder for a serious multivariate assessment, and whether
>or
> > not it led to a "winner or loser", it would begin to unlock the complexity
> > of actual applications in the real 3rd world which so often defeats the
>best
> > of technology driven development efforts
> >
> > What do you all think ?
>
>I think that your approach is very sound and practical for what you want to
>accomplish, and that such an approach will ultimately be necessary when
>various potential manufacturers seek to finalize their designs. This
>contest, or variants of it, is the first step down the road of improving
>stove science. The Stove World needs more "hard science" rather than more
>"opinions" and "soft knowledge".There are among the diverse Stove List
>members, at least  three nodes in the stove market channel: The Builders,
>the Facilitators, and Users. The Contest will be of great value to the
>Builders, and its benefits will eventually flow to the Facilitators and
>finally, to the Users.
>
>We are proposing a Contest, not "the be all and end all." The longest
>journey begins with the first step.
>
>Kindest regards,
>
>Kevin Chisholm
> >
>
>
>
>-
>Stoves List Archives and Website:
>http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
>http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
>
>Stoves List Moderators:
>Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
>Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net
>Elsen L. Karstad, elk@wananchi.com www.chardust.com
>
>List-Post: <mailto:stoves@crest.org>
>List-Help: <mailto:stoves-help@crest.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:stoves-unsubscribe@crest.org>
>List-Subscribe: <mailto:stoves-subscribe@crest.org>
>
>Sponsor the Stoves List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
>-
>Other Biomass Stoves Events and Information:
>http://www.bioenergy2002.org
>http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
>http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml
>
>For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
>http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D.,  Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 - 7/00
Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
Normal, IL  61790-4400   Voice:  309-438-7360;  FAX:  309-438-5310
E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: www.ilstu.edu/~psanders


-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net
Elsen L. Karstad, elk@wananchi.com www.chardust.com

List-Post: <mailto:stoves@crest.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stoves-help@crest.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:stoves-unsubscribe@crest.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:stoves-subscribe@crest.org>

Sponsor the Stoves List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
-
Other Biomass Stoves Events and Information:
http://www.bioenergy2002.org
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml

For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm