5 ms·

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 cen

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.
    - eveningcoffee 11y ago
      I meant the usage of chimneys, but yes, I could imagine how these claims can be extended to that too. Now * How do you expect a group of people unable to afford a stove to afford retrofitting their home with a chimney? * I am from nation with very poor and repressed background, but we managed to do that. For building a functioning oven with a chimney you do not need a lot of fancy material - just bricks, mortar (or can be even made from clay rich earth) and a iron plate. Of course these gadgets are expensive and stupid and this was my original criticism. * Your chimney solution solves none of these problems. * We do not know that as it was not even considered as it seems to me from the article. Instead they tried to sell complicated industrial products.
bryanlarsen 11y ago
AFAICT the improved biomass stoves they talk about in the article are essentially modern versions of the Franklin stove.
clock_tower 11y ago
Not two centuries, four to eight; or even more than that, if you're feeling uncharitable. The Roman Empire had chimneys; in the Middle Ages, they were rediscovered no later than the 12th century, and were common in residences no later than the 17th (1600s). Raised platforms for building cooking fires are also very 17th-century; they let you cook standing up, instead of squatting and ruining your back like the woman in the article. (There's a nice illustration of this in Braudel's _The Structures of Everyday Life_.) Smoke hoods were also available at that time.

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.
  - eveningcoffee 11y ago
    I meant the usage of chimneys, but yes, I could imagine how these claims can be extended to that too. Now * How do you expect a group of people unable to afford a stove to afford retrofitting their home with a chimney? * I am from nation with very poor and repressed background, but we managed to do that. For building a functioning oven with a chimney you do not need a lot of fancy material - just bricks, mortar (or can be even made from clay rich earth) and a iron plate. Of course these gadgets are expensive and stupid and this was my original criticism. * Your chimney solution solves none of these problems. * We do not know that as it was not even considered as it seems to me from the article. Instead they tried to sell complicated industrial products.

bryanlarsen 11y ago

AFAICT the improved biomass stoves they talk about in the article are essentially modern versions of the Franklin stove.

clock_tower 11y ago

Not two centuries, four to eight; or even more than that, if you're feeling uncharitable. The Roman Empire had chimneys; in the Middle Ages, they were rediscovered no later than the 12th century, and were common in residences no later than the 17th (1600s). Raised platforms for building cooking fires are also very 17th-century; they let you cook standing up, instead of squatting and ruining your back like the woman in the article. (There's a nice illustration of this in Braudel's _The Structures of Everyday Life_.) Smoke hoods were also available at that time.