5 ms·

>Perhaps more research could apprehend what actually works No, not really. Since the obvious solution (i.e. the one that has worked everywhere in the world it'

>Perhaps more research could apprehend what actually works No, not really. Since the obvious solution (i.e. the one that has worked everywhere in the world it's been tried) is affordable grid scale electricity - which at this point means fossil or nuclear - and the west is apparently hellbent on preventing the devolping world from having this, it's unlikely any future research will come up with anything of any actual utility.

pjc50 11y ago
The developing world cannot afford nuclear. The developed world can barely afford nuclear; see Hinkley Point C, on course to be the most expensive source of electricity in the UK. There isn't really a grand conspiracy to prevent the developing world having fossil fuels either. Developing world countries aren't not building power plants because of the Kyoto agreement, which barely binds them, they're not building them because of the usual mix of disorganisation, corruption and lack of access to capital.
- FussyZeus 11y ago
  I bet the 418 million pissed away on these stupid stoves would go a long way there. Maybe instead of trying to give them bits of civilization in the wilderness, we ought to just bring them out of the fucking wilderness entirely and be done with it.
  - panglott 11y ago
    Maybe it would be a good idea to try building a working electrical grid that can deliver power to rural areas before trying your hand at a nuclear power plant?
- merpnderp 11y ago
  Vietnam is building out nuclear at an incredibly fast rate. Hardly a wealthy nation. They'll get 100 years out of those reactors.
eveningcoffee 11y ago
There is actually even simpler solution. Build a chimney and exhaust the burning fumes directly to the outside. Problem solved. These people are living two centuries in the past so proved, simple and local solutions would be the best.
- intopieces 11y ago
  You solution doesn't take into account any of the issues discovered in the implementation of the stove programs. Not only is the issue more complex than you acknowledge, but it's this kind of "we can fix this problem by making them do things our way" attitude that severely hinders progress on the issue.
  - mring33621 11y ago
    Sometimes 'our way' (meaning a different way than is currently practiced) is actually superior and it is a foolish 'culture' that chooses to ignore measurable improvements. Chimney != cultural bias; Chimney == physics.
  - eveningcoffee 11y ago
    The article did not evaluate such issues. If you could point to any background information then I would be interested.
    - intopieces 11y ago
      A significant portion of the article is devoted to such issues. "Even if people are aware of the health risks of cooking over open fires (and many are not), they are reluctant to abandon cooking methods embedded in their culture." "Women had stopped using the stoves because they didn’t like the design or because the stoves broke, burned more wood (not less, as intended) or didn’t get foods hot enough." "Indian women surveyed by the Stockholm Environment Institute said they prefer to cook roti, a flatbread eaten with every meal, in a clay oven using a mix of firewood and cow dung because they can both fry and bake the bread and the fuels improve the taste — much like some American cooks like the flavor of meat grilled over charcoal." "The affordable ones are inadequate, and the good ones are unaffordable.” (How do you expect a group of people unable to afford a stove to afford retrofitting their home with a chimney?) Your chimney solution solves none of these problems. When attempting to address an issue in developing nations, it's importent to analyze exactly how people are implementing he solution on the ground. Cultural grandstanding as seen in these comments does nothing to solve the problem.

pjc50 11y ago

The developing world cannot afford nuclear. The developed world can barely afford nuclear; see Hinkley Point C, on course to be the most expensive source of electricity in the UK. There isn't really a grand conspiracy to prevent the developing world having fossil fuels either. Developing world countries aren't not building power plants because of the Kyoto agreement, which barely binds them, they're not building them because of the usual mix of disorganisation, corruption and lack of access to capital.

FussyZeus 11y ago
I bet the 418 million pissed away on these stupid stoves would go a long way there. Maybe instead of trying to give them bits of civilization in the wilderness, we ought to just bring them out of the fucking wilderness entirely and be done with it.
- panglott 11y ago
  Maybe it would be a good idea to try building a working electrical grid that can deliver power to rural areas before trying your hand at a nuclear power plant?
merpnderp 11y ago
Vietnam is building out nuclear at an incredibly fast rate. Hardly a wealthy nation. They'll get 100 years out of those reactors.

eveningcoffee 11y ago

There is actually even simpler solution. Build a chimney and exhaust the burning fumes directly to the outside. Problem solved. These people are living two centuries in the past so proved, simple and local solutions would be the best.

intopieces 11y ago
You solution doesn't take into account any of the issues discovered in the implementation of the stove programs. Not only is the issue more complex than you acknowledge, but it's this kind of "we can fix this problem by making them do things our way" attitude that severely hinders progress on the issue.
- mring33621 11y ago
  Sometimes 'our way' (meaning a different way than is currently practiced) is actually superior and it is a foolish 'culture' that chooses to ignore measurable improvements. Chimney != cultural bias; Chimney == physics.
- eveningcoffee 11y ago
  The article did not evaluate such issues. If you could point to any background information then I would be interested.
  - intopieces 11y ago
    A significant portion of the article is devoted to such issues. "Even if people are aware of the health risks of cooking over open fires (and many are not), they are reluctant to abandon cooking methods embedded in their culture." "Women had stopped using the stoves because they didn’t like the design or because the stoves broke, burned more wood (not less, as intended) or didn’t get foods hot enough." "Indian women surveyed by the Stockholm Environment Institute said they prefer to cook roti, a flatbread eaten with every meal, in a clay oven using a mix of firewood and cow dung because they can both fry and bake the bread and the fuels improve the taste — much like some American cooks like the flavor of meat grilled over charcoal." "The affordable ones are inadequate, and the good ones are unaffordable.” (How do you expect a group of people unable to afford a stove to afford retrofitting their home with a chimney?) Your chimney solution solves none of these problems. When attempting to address an issue in developing nations, it's importent to analyze exactly how people are implementing he solution on the ground. Cultural grandstanding as seen in these comments does nothing to solve the problem.