[Stoves] Forest residues use, as applied to the wet process /low pressure, hand briquettemaking, briquetter....

Crispin Pemberton-Pigott crispinpigott at gmail.com
Sat Dec 4 07:26:08 CST 2010


Dear Timothy

 

Emissions are not produced by fuels, they are produced by stoves. Any fuel
can be burned cleanly if the device is tuned to it. The question facing fuel
makers is: how do I burn this fuel I have, cleanly? There is always an
answer.

 

I was speaking to GERES (North Asia) a couple of days ago and we are
thinking about making a fairly large dung burning stove. There is a huge
need for such a device. The literature will tell you that dung is a ‘dirty
smoky fuel with a low combustion efficiency’. Well, those are all problems
of the stove, not the fuel. Dung is a great fuel!

 

Regards

Crispin

 

 

From: stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Timothy Roy
Longwell
Sent: 04 December 2010 20:14
To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Forest residues use, as applied to the wet process
/low pressure, hand briquettemaking, briquetter....

 

Greetings,

 

Has anyone else done emissions evaluations of briquettes? We have found that
briquettes made of a) sawdust, b) grass and c) pine needles (with newspaper
as the binding agent) have higher carbon monoxide and dioxide and PM when
compared with pine fire wood.

 

Regards,

 

Ing. Timothy Roy Longwell

Profesor Asociado de la Carrera de Desarrollo Socioeconómico y Ambiente, 

Jefe de la Empresa Universitaria Forestales 

E. A. P. El Zamorano

Honduras, América Central

 

From: stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Anand Karve
Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2010 5:09 AM
To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Forest residues use, as applied to the wet process
/low pressure, hand briquettemaking, briquetter....

 

Dear Richard,

agricultural residues are difficult to collect from the field if the crop is
harvested using a combine harvester. But in most farms in India, the
harvesting is done manually and the threshing is done on a threshing floor.
In such a case, a huge quantity of residue accumulates near the threshing
floor. The officials of the Department of Agriculture recommend that the
residues be either composted or spread back on the field to rot there. But
the farmers burn the residues instead. Since the residues are present at one
place in relatively large quantities, one can think of briquetting them
either as such or after charring them.   

Yours

A.D.Karve

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:21 PM, Richard Stanley <rstanley at legacyfound.org>
wrote:

The resource picture as applied to wet process briquetting, would tend to
see the actual forest resource data a bot more  selectively, because they
will just be picking off the leaf and twig faction...  

 

Even at that, few producers, working in their local  capacity as self
contained and sustained, unsubsidized  entrepreneurships, will go around
raking up leaves off a forest floor because it's simply too much work !
They and we here in Obamaland-- for our own household, will generally just
look for this stuff where its windblown in depressions or other natural
areas of wind deposition (corners of buildings, curbs, trenches,  gullies
etc)...These places are,  nicely enough, usually locations where the leaf
extraction is both aesthetically friendly and environmentally neutral,
because their removal cleans up the environment and has little to zero
impact on soil tilth..

 

Even at that however, ag residues are only part of the resource. 

Why ? Simple economy of effort. Most of us will prefer to seek out readily
available commercial processing wastes ( sawdust/ rice husks / charcoal
crumbs/ waste paper and selected cartonboard residues) as these do not
require fermentation and / or entensive retting. 

 

The ag residue blending part requires greater skills in handling too: Its
for Briquetting 202

 

Pressing on,

 

Richard Stanley

back home in Obamaland

 

 

On Dec 3, 2010, at 3:38 AM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott wrote:

 

Dear Ron and Richard

 

I have seen it writ here and there that 50% of the biomass of a commercially
managed forest remains on the forest floor after harvesting (branches,
leaves and stumps). It is often raked into rows and burned to prevent fires
later.

 

Regards

Crispin

 

 

_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
Stoves mailing list

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists
.org

for more Biomass Cooking Stoves,  News and Information see our web site:
http://www.bioenergylists.org/
Stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists
.org

 


_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
Stoves mailing list

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists
.org

for more Biomass Cooking Stoves,  News and Information see our web site:
http://www.bioenergylists.org/
Stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists
.org




-- 
***
Dr. A.D. Karve
President, Appropriate Rural Technology Institute (ARTI)

*Please change my email address in your records to: adkarve at gmail.com *



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20101204/65a271c9/attachment.html>


More information about the Stoves mailing list