Again you are correct about carbon credits. But you are trying to
UN-link stove carbon credits from the issues of climate change and
Drawdown, about which we must also discuss these char-producing (and
very clean burning) TLUD stoves.
The readers of the Stoves Listservs and the moderators (all very great
people) have repeatedly rejected that the drawdown / climate change
issues should be fully aired on this Stoves Listserv.
Please realize the difference. Case 1: Some charcoal stoves (as in
the Uga Stove in Uganda that received great praise for being the first
carbon credit / Gold Standard project for stoves) earn 1 or 1.5 carbon
credits per year for using LESS charcoal, but that charcoal is STILL
produced very poorly via traditional char-making methods. Case 2:
The TLUD stoves (as in the ChampionTLUD in India) is earning 4 (as in
FOUR) carbon credits per year for using LESS biomas (wood) fuel from
sustainable sources AND YIELDING CHARCOAL that has economic value AND
value for carbon credits (2 of those 4 carbon credits).
Simply bringing up this previous paragraph is pushing the limits of what
is the purpose of the Stoves Listserv. And if the purpose were to be
expanded, we would lose some Stoves readers. I am looking for where
people are already discussing drawdown and climate change AND would
welcome the stoves contribution.
All comments are welcome.
On 9/10/2017 2:02 PM, Andrew Heggie wrote:
> On 10 September 2017 at 18:53, Paul Anderson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> You have stated (correctly) the precise reason that I do NOT want to conduct
>> the needed discussions on the Stoves Listserv.
>> The needed discussion is regardless of whether the TLUD stoves are used for
>> making biochar or for sequestering char or for simply needing less wood for
>> the cooking tasks.
> I’m surprised at your reply Paul, I don’t understand why you feel that
> my reason is precisely why you don’t want to discuss carbon credits on
> Carbon credits exist just as much as other subsidies which are
> applicable to stoves.