Financing The Optimal Cookstove

Ted Redelmeier

How can the Optimal Cookstove be Financially

Viable?

Gasifier + Rice Husk = <3

Working Hypothesis:If(optimal cook stove)Then

{(minimize respiratory disease) + (efficient use biomass feedstock) + (carbon sequestration) + (soil restoration) + (rural poverty alleviation)}

Optimal Cookstove => Char CreationOptimal Cookstove => Income Generation

“Equal & Opposites”

[C+] + [C-] = [C=]

“Equal & Opposites”

[C++] = [C++]

“Equal & Opposites”

[C++] + [C--] = [C==]

$Trillions in Foreign Aid Over the Last 50 Years

When we’re used to gifts we get an attitude of entitlement

Microfinance: A Couple of Characteristics

➔ Alleviates poverty??➔ Reduced transactions costs of serving

the poor

The Cookstove must Cook AND Generate Revenue

The Dilemma of the Inequality

The Inequality:

$[char as heat and electricity] >=< $[char as C--] and $[char as biochar]

No markets for the RHS, wherever there is available woody biomass [char as heat and electricity] is made and there is a local market for charcoal.

Therefore no biochar, no carbon sequestration.

Hypothetical Rice Farming Family

Hypothetical Family Gets an Optimal Cookstove

Rice Husk - Cookstove - Biochar - [C--]

[C--] Agent Exchanges $ and [C--] property with [Ted]

[C--] Bought And Sold

Carbon “Offsets” vs. Carbon “Equal & Opposites”

The Difference Between Substitutes and Complements

OFFSETS

• Does nothing to remove CO2 from the short term carbon cycle

• Only succeed in changing the rate of C++ activities

• Attempt to substitute net or inherently carbon neutral energy for C++ energy;

EQUAL & OPPOSITES

• Permanently removes CO2 from the short term carbon cycle

• Acts to complement C++ activities with C-- activities

• [C--] is a complement to [C++], facilitates the creation of a universal energy market that is uniformly carbon neutral [C=] and [C==]

Scaling up the Numbers

Financing The Optimal Cookstove

Ted Redelmeier