[Stoves] [biochar] allAfrica.com: Africa: Biochar -UnfulfilledPromises in Cameroon

Thu Dec 29 12:00:26 CST 2011

Hi Kevin,

One question - are you saying that these 2 categories you're suggesting are 
mutually exclusive?

> Should there be two fundamental categories for "Improved Stoves" as 
> follows:
> 1: "Efficient Stoves with Low Indoor Air Pollution"
> and
> 2: "Stoves Producing Biochar"

Not being a technical guy myself but helping to run a pilot in The Gambia 
all I know is what our target market wants:
1) Pay less for fuel for the same result
2) Pay less for fuel for the same result
3) to whatever....... same again
Way down on the list:
Have a good stove that is easy to work
Have a good stove that is affordable
Have a good stove that is safe to use
Bring health benefits (IAP)
Help saving trees
Reduce GHG emmissions (whatever they are - in their perception)

Cheers
George from the Jungle - well.... sort of

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kevin" <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>
To: <crispinpigott at gmail.com>; "Discussion of biomass cooking stoves" 
<stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 5:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Stoves] [biochar] allAfrica.com: Africa: 
Biochar -UnfulfilledPromises in Cameroon

> Dear Crispin
>
> One definition of a "Stove" is "a device that consumes a fuel to produce 
> heat."
>
> As recently defined by the List Owner, "... This stoves discussion group 
> is for cooking stoves for developing countries, ..."  In most stove, 
> boiler, and furnace systems, efficiency is measured by the degree to which 
> the fuel can do the intended job. One of the significant efficiency losses 
> in a poor stove, boiler, or furnace system is "Carbon Loss", ie, unburned 
> fuel in the ash pit.
>
> Thus, if the Stove Owner wishes to minimize the requirement for input 
> fuel, a stove that produces biochar would be a poor choice, in that it 
> would consume more input fuel than a stove that burned the biochar. 
> Clearly, however, if the Stove Owner wants biochar, because biochar gives 
> benefits greater than the cost of extra fuel, then a "Char Producing 
> Stove" is "a good thing."
>
> Should there be two fundamental categories for "Improved Stoves" as 
> follows:
> 1: "Efficient Stoves with Low Indoor Air Pollution"
> and
> 2: "Stoves Producing Biochar"
>
> For those interested in minimizing their fuel requirements, and IAP, they 
> would look for stoves in the first Category, but if they wanted biochar, 
> then they would look in the second category.
>
> Biochar is "a good thing" for those who want it", and a "bad thing" for 
> those who don't.
>
> Should not the Stove Buyer or Maker be given a clear choice of the stove 
> type that is best for his/her specific circumstances?
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Kevin
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Crispin Pemberton-Pigott" <crispinpigott at gmail.com>
> To: "Discussion of biomass cooking stoves" 
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2011 9:12 AM
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] [biochar] allAfrica.com: Africa: Biochar - 
> UnfulfilledPromises in Cameroon
>
>
>> Dear Friends
>>
>> 1. There is a reasonable review of the issues raised at 
>> http://geoengineeringpolitics.blogspot.com/2011/12/biochar-fund-giving-biochar-bad-name.html 
>> drawing the obvious conclusion that one project, good or bad, does not 
>> make or break a technology.
>>
>> 2. Readers will note from reports that the application rates were 10 to 
>> 20 tons per hectare. This is the same range I used in my calculations for 
>> the stove-produced char earlier this year. The indications are that if 
>> stoves are to be a major source for biochar applied to agriculture, the 
>> timeline for conversion/meaningful application is not 7 years as 
>> indicated by Biochar Fund, but considerably longer.
>>
>> 3. If the charcoal production rate was 12.5% and the source material was 
>> wood, they applied about 20 tons per ha, and they used about 1/2 the 
>> biomass as wood input to the charcoal kiln, it means they used 320 tons 
>> of biomass to treat a hectare (320,000 kg). If a family were to produce 
>> cooking stove char at twice that efficiency at a rate of 0,5 kg per day, 
>> it would take 320,000 days to treat one hectare, roughly a millenium. 
>> This is a statistically significant difference in the estimated time for 
>> biochar production.
>>
>> 4. As there are suggestions that as much as 50% of applied char is 
>> missing (not sequestered) after only one year in some soils, so there 
>> maybe a need to re-apply char. There may be an upper limit for the carbon 
>> content of biologically active soil (self-limiting). It seems to confirm 
>> strong variability in the results.
>>
>> 5. What is not clear to me is that charcoal application to soil has 
>> anything like a universally positive result, or that cooking stoves offer 
>> a meaningful way to produce the quantities required to see the beneficial 
>> effects, or that it would not be a great deal more efficient to make 
>> charcoal on site or alternatively, to just bury the biomass as a green 
>> manure fertiliser. Comparisons are required.
>>
>> Regards
>> Crispin
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kevin C <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>
>> Sender: stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
>> Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 22:50:57
>> To: <rongretlarson at comcast.net>
>> Reply-To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
>> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>> Cc: Erich Knight<erichjknight at gmail.com>; 
>> biochar-policy<biochar-policy at yahoogroups.com>; 
>> <biochar at yahoogroups.com>; Discussion of 
>> biomass<stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Stoves] [biochar] allAfrica.com: Africa: Biochar - 
>> Unfulfilled
>> Promises in Cameroon
>>
>> Quoting rongretlarson at comcast.net:
>>
>>> Kevin and several lists:
>>>
>>> 1. You said below: "# I have read the BFW Report. What are the
>>> "Selected Quotes" to which you refer? "
>>>
>>> Answer: They were in the cite I gave about a dozen lines earlier (my
>>> second line under "2"):
>>>
>>> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar-production/message/833:
>>
>> # Thanks. However, I am reluctant to discuss selected quotes out of
>> context. Selected quotes leave the door wide open for "cherry
>> picking". If you could start by selecting a few of the quotes that you
>> feel are most relevant, tehn we can focus on them in context.
>>>
>>> 2. I think our discussion on Rademakers and BFW would go better
>>> after hearing your response to those quotes (of BFW).
>>
>> # I would suggest that neither of us are competent to discuss the
>> correctness and fairness (or incorrectness and unfairness of the BFW
>> Report, unless we have first hand facts. Mr. Rademaker and his work
>> are being discussed in the BFW Report. Mr. Rademaker would have the
>> first hand facts to discuss or rebut the BFW Report. What does he say
>> on the matter?
>>>
>>> 3. I have more coming on this topic (which I put in a "Box" labeled
>>> "BFW" - not "Biochar", and certainly not "stoves").
>>
>> # Anything that leads to "Truth In Biochar", and makes it easier for a
>> Farmer to decide on the merits of Biochar utilization in his operation
>> is of great interest to me.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Kevin
>>>
>>> Ron
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Kevin C" <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>
>>> To: rongretlarson at comcast.net
>>> Cc: biochar at yahoogroups.com, "Discussion of biomass"
>>> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>, "Erich Knight"
>>> <erichjknight at gmail.com>, "biochar-policy"
>>> <biochar-policy at yahoogroups.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 2:01:42 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [biochar] [Stoves] allAfrica.com: Africa: Biochar -
>>> Unfulfilled Promises in Cameroon
>>>
>>> Quoting rongretlarson at comcast.net:
>>>
>>>> Kevin and ccs:
>>>>
>>>> 1. This is getting complicated - as the dialog has shifted from the
>>>> BFW story on Africa/Rademakers over to the IBI material.prepared by
>>>> Kelpie Wilson. My perception is that you are looking for specific
>>>> information from both reports that were not intended and aren't
>>>> there. So I see no reason to respond to your questions about
>>>> Kelpie's IBI work .
>>>
>>> # This is not complicated at all:
>>> a: BFW presents a report on biochar tests
>>> b. "Defenders of the Faith" demonize BFW, rather than showing where
>>> their Report is wrong in a factual, scientific, and professional manner.
>>> c: I made no mention of Kelpie's work.
>>> d: You would appear to be clouding the issue, to avoid dealing with
>>> the matter in a factual way. I am amused that you criticize me for
>>> asking for information that is not in the report, and which the report
>>> did not intend to convey (why the corn with biochar grew so well), yet
>>> you do not criticize Erich when he assumes that it was the biochar,
>>> and not other conditions, that made the corn grow so well. (more
>>> water, fertilizer, organic matter, manure, compost, better soil in
>>> general, better test management, etc.)
>>>>
>>>> 2. The BFW story was covered on the biochar lists about a month ago; 
>>>> see:
>>>> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar-production/message/833
>>>> It is unfortunate that this story is started over again on the
>>>> stoves list. It doesn't belong - there is zero stoves aspect to the
>>>> BFW story..
>>>
>>> # You yourself are using the Stoves List as a way to promote biochar
>>> production! How can you possibly say that the Article has no relevance
>>> to Stoves? If the BFW Article has a valid basis, then it would suggest
>>> that the potential for biochar is diminished. Nobody so far has
>>> refuted their article in a rational manner. Can you?
>>>>
>>>> 3. I look forward to hearing your reaction to the selected quotes
>>>> from BFW's report - which I presume you have not yet read.
>>>
>>> # I have read the BFW Report. What are the "Selected Quotes" to which
>>> you refer?
>>>
>>> Best wishes for a happy and Prosperous 2012
>>>
>>> Kevin
>>>>
>>>> Ron
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Kevin C" <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>
>>>> To: biochar at yahoogroups.com
>>>> Sent: Monday, December 26, 2011 8:37:12 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [biochar] [Stoves] allAfrica.com: Africa: Biochar -
>>>> Unfulfilled Promises in Cameroon
>>>>
>>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>