[Stoves] Hi TLUDers -- and EPA testing questions

rongretlarson at comcast.net rongretlarson at comcast.net
Tue Oct 25 13:03:25 PDT 2011




Alex cc stoves list: 

1. Thanks for the input. I also have found a case where CO2 exceeded CO content: see Fig 3 in 
http://ncsu.edu/bioresources/BioRes_04/BioRes_04_3_0946_Wang_CDYZS_Gas_Char_Microwave_Pyrol_Pine_Sawdust_504.pdf 

2. But in general I have found CO to be (by far) the largest pyrolysis gas output. See for instance, Fig 4 at: 
http://www.btgworld.com/uploads/documents/Gasification%20Attachment%20Website%20v2.pdf 

The use of equivalence ratio (used in that figure) could be a very good one for us to try to report. 

3. I haven't found the right cite yet - but some might like this paper/chapter showing a range of values for CO: 
http://nariphaltan.virtualave.net/gasbook.pdf 

4. I wandered around various gas monitoring equipment web sites - and saw lots on IR approaches. Do you think that is the right one? I have given up looking for an optimum approach - as there is a huge array out there - and mostly very expensive. If I had to buy an instrument, I would start by seeing what University researchers report what they are using. Maybe someone on the list is into this measurement topic. 

Ron 
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex English" <english at kingston.net> 
To: "Discussion of biomass cooking stoves" <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org> 
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 4:54:41 AM 
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Hi TLUDers -- and EPA testing questions 

Ron, Crispin, 
Many moons ago, when I had access to an IR CO,CO2 monitor, I filtered the gasses before the flame on a TLUD. If memory serves me I got 9% CO and 15% CO2. But memory sometimes seems to be serving others. If only we had access to the old archives, I reported it to this list at the time, but alas the 'server' changed. It amazes me that nobody has done this since. 
Alex 


On 24/10/2011 10:41 PM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott wrote: 




Dear Ron 








>> “For those not having experience with TLUDs, Dean's reference to "no primary air can make it up", means that the oxygen is "entirely" used to produce carbon monoxide.” 

… 



>> It is really rare to find a normalised CO emissions factor (not concentration in the emerging gases) above 100,000 ppm. I have only see it once and I work with some of the wildest devices the imagination has produced. 

> [RWL: This part I don't understand. Neither Dean or I were talking about anything other than primary air. 



I see that you did not follow. I am sure is it my method of describing it. Here is a short version: You can’t get pure CO from biomass pyrolysis for inherent chemical reasons. 



Proof that I offer: I have measured CO production across a wide range of conditions and it is almost impossible to get more than 10% CO even when it is theoretically possible (from the elemental composition) to get 40%. 



>> CO(ppm) * (EA+100%) = CO(EF) at O2=0% (the O2 is factored out). 



> [RWL3: The subject of excess air for testing the completeness of combustion (after adding secondary air and releasing the majority of the energy) is extraneous to the sentence under discussion.] 



That is how to work out what the CO level is, in ppm. 100,000 ppm is 10%. 



>> I mention this to support my conclusion that the O2 tends to create ‘fuel moisture’ very easily. 



> I have personally measured the gases coming up through the fuel bed in a TLUD (a borrowed high quality tool) and the dominant gas was CO (many millions of ppm). 



That is impossible. 1 million parts per million is 100% CO. 



>> RWL4: My main concern is with Crispin's above next-to-last sentence: " I am expressing doubts that level could be created in a TLUD that was not first run as a regular fire. 

The word "TLUD" should say to all that the test operation was NOT run as a regular fire. They are as near to polar opposites as the stove world can get. So this is to ask Crispin what he is saying here and what part of my response he is objecting to? 



I am offering a method of how to get a CO content as high as 10%. Start a regular fire, get it going well, then enclose it in a vessel while hot and running. This can produce 10% CO, but a TLUD cannot. That is my contention. 



Biomass needs just a little more air (Oxygen) to completely use up the H2 and then breathe in whatever additional air would burn all the Carbon. In any real file, some of the C becomes CO and CO2 (surface reactions mentioned by Dr Tom Reed in a previous discussion). 



>> [RWL: I hope we can get a specific citation for/from Tom here. 



He addressed it directly previously on two occasions. 



> At the hot surface from which (very complicated and numerous [1000's of species??]) pyrolysis gases are emerging, my understanding of the pyrolysis surface effect literature is that "all" (given control of the incoming oxygen flow) are turned into CO and water. 



My point is that if there is NO air entering, virtually all the O2 in the fuel is turned into water. The great proportion. Some of the H2 is left in the gas but is it hard to find an H2(EF) of 15,000 (1.5%). I have no problem with others contradicting this with real measurements. 



>> The relatively small amount of CO2 that is produced near the surface (not ON) is converted back to CO as it interacts with the hot char above it 



This only happens under certain conditions and not when it is cool. Dr Tom was mentioning C=> CO2 reactions taking place above 400 C on the surface. CO can also be formed, and volatiles (which contain carbon) can break down into CO as well. The CO in the gas is not necessarily produced from CO2 and is unlikely if the temperature is low because it has to absorb a lot of heat to do so (24 MJ/kg). 



> So I repeat - I am mystified by this message and about what is at dispute. 



I am not sure there is a dispute. Perhaps the clarification will suffice. 



Regards 

Crispin 



_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org 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 mailing list 

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address 
stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org 

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/ 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20111025/ad68cbfb/attachment.html>


More information about the Stoves mailing list