[Stoves] High mass space heating options Re: Rocket Stove for the PLACE

[Alex English]

Roger,
There are indeed many reasons not to make char. However char is very 
different from ash. In fact some say it is unique and there is no 
synthetic equivalent. Two of it's special properties that are well 
understood and desirable are its ability to absorb/adsorb and that it is 
resistant to microbial decay.  This is why people want to explore ways 
of making it. It can vary widely in its properties based on how it is 
made and what it is made out of.  If it truely has value then it changes 
the equations associated with bioenergy. Its not just about energy its 
about utility. We currently produce many products from biomass and often 
extract energy from what is left. Char is just another possible product, 
one with some potentially significant environmental benefits.

Alex

On 10/10/2011 1:57 PM, Fireside Hearth wrote:
> Hello all,
>
>          It is in my limited understanding that "bio char" gives a 
> home to microbial organisms which in turn bring much needed "natural 
> fertilizers" to ones garden, is this true? From the reading I have 
> done I can not think of any way of creating the char without 
> sustaining other losses, many of which can be seen in pictures of 
> destructive practices, slash burns, air pollution, and the ridiculous 
> end cost of the process on our environment.
>          From the text below I have the gut response of the following 
> analogy. The race car driver and the Granny. Mario Andretti rapidly 
> goes from the gas pedal to the brake pedal and back to get every ounce 
> of performance he can from his machine.....screw economy. The Granny 
> acts as if there is an egg shell between her foot and the pedal which 
> she wants to keep safe at all cost. Who gets the best fuel 
> economy.......surely not Mario. In this thinking I bring up the 
> "Russian fireplace", The oldest and most widely used High Mass heater 
> I have known in my 26 years. They are typically loaded up with 80 lbs 
> of fuel and burned off one or two times per day. Thats up to 160 
> pounds every 24 hours, and no char is left. I believe that the common 
> EPA certified wood stove can provide just as much "useable" heat to 
> ones home with allot less fuel, and no char is left.
>         So, I am asking out loud.......are we better off selecting the 
> heat source that gets more for our waning resources, and maybe asking 
> if there is another medium for giving a home to these microbial 
> critters other than just the "char". What is it about the char that is 
> beneficial? Does the ash from the fire also allow for the "housing" 
> process?  Can we learn to utilize this process in a way that does not 
> cost mother earth an arm and a leg? If this process really works as 
> well as proponents claim, then there must also be an ecologically 
> intelligent way to create a medium for housing these life giving microbes.
>
>                 Comments?
>
>                   Roger.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20111010/f395d420/attachment.html>