[Stoves] Combining stoves, bioliquidfuels, and Biochar - Possible for all together?

Fri Aug 10 23:00:27 CDT 2012

Ron,

   I have also corresponded quite extensively with Mr. Harry Stokes a 
couple of years ago at about the time I was supporting Nathaniel Mulcahy 
and his initial Stove project work in Haiti after the earthquake.

   Harry had noted at the time that 3 billion liters of hydrous ethanol 
are traded through the Caribbean from Brazil every year, yet he had 
noted that there are a number of major ethanol producers in Central 
America and the Caribbean who are constrained to consistently 
under-produce because of the want of a market.

   He noted that " /If these countries could produce and sell into a 
domestic stove fuel market, they could again produce for a market that 
would justify a robust agricultural base.With a healthy agricultural 
sector and the application of best practices, they could rebuild their 
soils and croplands, which now lie fallow./"
  (This was Harry's "Build Back Better" approach... as was being 
promoted by Bill Clinton after the earthquake: a pathway to 
sustainability for Haiti.)

   At the time I was also in conversation with Roger Samson of REAP 
Canada, and I had suggested to Mr. Stokes that he might also wish to 
consider using Agave was as the feedstock for producing liquid fuels 
(ethanol etc), which, according to Arturo Velez, can produce 3X more 
sugars than sugarcane, while thriving on drylands / "marginal land" (it 
thrives with only 190mm of rain per year and can produce very high 
yields with very low or no inputs) and could potentially achieve massive 
production due to year-around harvesting and World-wide geographical 
distribution (Drylands cover about 40% of the Earth's surface; >60 
million square Km, @ ~20% of US territory and >75% of Mexico).
   [Harry had suggested Sweet sorghum instead since it is a dryland crop 
that builds soil fertility very effectively. ~ I believe that he was 
also working with the International Institute for Ecological Agriculture 
(IIEA) and looking into other 'dryland' feedstocks such as Giant 
Milkweed and Prosopis (mesquite).]

   While Harry was working with a core team of developers to raise 
capital for a business that would essentially mass produce small, 
efficient, simple but highly engineered "micro distilleries" (for places 
like Haiti), I had noted that the leftover "bagasse" from these 
distilleries could also be used to make Biochar.

   I had originally suggested that the enormous amounts of bagasse that 
result from the production of sustainable alcohols from drylands 
feedstocks could be processed in such a way as to produce other liquid 
fuels (bio-oils) industrially (in systems such as those produced by 
companies like Agritherm, ABRI Tech or Ensyn) -- such that massive 
quantities of both bio-oil and Biochar could be produced (and 
sequestered)...   however, if CPB could also convert this bagasse into 
another type of liquid fuel (the 'N100' that could in turn be used in 
engines and other types of bio-liquid fuel stoves), we could truly 
achieve very substantial "carbon negativity".

Regards,

   Lloyd Helferty, Engineering Technologist
   Principal, Biochar Consulting (Canada)
   www.biochar-consulting.ca
   48 Suncrest Blvd, Thornhill, ON, Canada
   905-707-8754
   CELL: 647-886-8754
      Skype: lloyd.helferty
   Steering Committee coordinator
   Canadian Biochar Initiative (CBI)
   President, Co-founder&  CBI Liaison, Biochar-Ontario
   Partner of Toronto Urban Ag Summit! www.urbanagsummit.org
   See also: http://www.facebook.com/UrbanAgSummit
   Manager, Biochar Offsets Group:
            http://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=&gid=2446475
    Advisory Committee Member, IBI
   http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1404717
   http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=42237506675
   http://groups.google.com/group/biochar-ontario
   http://www.meetup.com/biocharontario/
   http://www.biocharontario.ca
    www.biochar.ca

"The history of every nation is eventually written in the way it cares for its soil."
  - Franklin D. Roosevelt

On 2012-08-10 5:24 PM, rongretlarson at comcast.net wrote:
> List:
>
>     1.  A short time ago,  I sent in a brief announcement (below) 
> about Harry Stokes.  Without committing him,  I think he supports the 
> following as a new way to obtain and promote this list's emphasis:  
> improved biomass stoves for developing countries.
>
>     2.  The following idea naturally follows from last week's 
> successful Biochar conference in Sonoma.  This conference has been 
> discussed some on the sister Biochar lists, but not here, although 
> there were several persons presenting there on stoves.  Presumably 
> most stoves list members interested in Biochar already know all about 
> that other list - but for others,  I recommend a look at this site 
> (save it - it doesn't pop up in Google searches)
>     
> http://2012.biochar.us.com/299/2012-us-biochar-conference-presentations
>
>     3.  For many at the conference, I think the most important new 
> Biochar material related to a new company, that had not presented 
> previously at Biochar meetings (probably because they are better known 
> as a biofuels company).   But they advertise a fuel they call N100 - 
> which means 100 Percent as much carbon negativity as carbon 
> neutrality.   I think the main buzz was because they are well funded 
> by some very big players. This and a bit more (I recommend the 14 
> minute video by corporate founder Mike Cheiky) on the company 
> (shorthand CPB) are at:
>        www.coolplanetbiofuels.com
>
>     4.   There was no discussion at the Sonoma meeting nor is there 
> any discussion at the CPB web site of using their biofuel product for 
> our list interest:  rural biomass cookstoves.  Emphasizing their 
> bioliquids also for stoves could be a big winner - along the lines of 
> what Harry Stokes has been doing.  The big difference from Stokes' 
> work is that char and carbon negativity automatically follow with use 
> of the CPB fuels  - not possible with any other bioliquidfuel I am 
> aware of.   I emphasize "automatic"   -  the char is a left-over but 
> can contain half the initial carbon  (30% char by weight is being 
> stated).  Surprisingly, there is very little release of CO2 during 
> production, and some or much is exothermic.
>
>    5.    The CPB website gives plenty of reasons they can be 
> successful - but none related to stoves.  My reasons for thinking that 
> their's could be a successful approach for stove use are:
>      a.   The CPB biofuel is already being planned to be produced in 
> developing countries.  Rather than importing fossil kerosene, LPG, 
> propane, etc with inevitably rising prices - the CPB fuels will be 
> least cost at the point of manufacture, near to the stove users.  
> Maybe even able to use a biofuel for cooking that is slightly 
> substandard for engines.
>      b.    Char-making stoves have many positive attributes (that I 
> have been promoting for 17 + years), but a bioliquids fuel approach 
> can probably always be cleaner, more adjustable (turn-down ratio), be 
> adaptable to multiple pots and will not be batch-limited.
>      c.   Char-making stoves will hopefully soon be eligible for 
> carbon credits, but dealing with small single family or even village 
> scale auditing violates all we know about existing credit hurdles.  A 
> large entity (CPB or someone they sell equipment to) will already be 
> well equipped to work for carbon neutral credits;  adding carbon 
> negative credits from their co-product Biochar will be easier than for 
> any other industry group I can think of.
>      d.   Cooks in developing countries are already choosing liquid 
> fuel stoves - when they can be afforded.  There are existing supply 
> chains for fuel and stoves.  LPG fuels are already in short supply.
>      e.   I think it possible for the barter system that Nat Mulcahy 
> (WorldStoves) has developed to also work here.  A wood gatherer can 
> exchange the raw materials for a bioliquid - and (a guess?) do less 
> wood gathering than at present.   This time savings will be 
> complemented by time savings while cooking with a liquid fuel.   And 
> health issues.  The same firm supplying the CPB carbon-negative 
> biofuel can also supply a (hopefully) low cost (and probably 
> pre-primed) Biochar with the same barter exchange of ag wastes, etc.
>      f.    Char-making stoves work best in a rural environment.  But 
> the majority of potential users of any future carbon negative biofuel 
> are now living in cities - where the price competition for a carbon 
> negative form of cooking is easiest
>      g.    Lastly and most important to me   - I have argued strongly 
> on this list for a total prohibition of charcoal-using stoves because 
> they are so wasteful.  This approach could help in policing the 
> presently largely illegal production of char.  Since CPB will be 
> precharging their char for ag purposes, it would be incredibly stupid 
> to burn that char.  Char for ag use is likely to look more different 
> as well as just being too small for cooking.
>
> 6.   What should be the impact of the above on other stove types 
> discussed on this list?
>     a.  I think this biofuels approach might help as a backup for 
> solar cookers.  Biomass supply will always be insufficient if we get 
> serious about excess atmospheric carbon - so a combined solar-liquids 
> approach could be a least cost approach.
>     b.  Of course,  I hope a biofuel stove kills all use of fossil 
> fuels for cooking or heating - because of my perceived need to get 
> quickly to 350 ppm.  My hope would be that coal use in Ulan Bataa, for 
> instance, might prove to be more expensive than the use of wood from 
> northern Mongolia, since the biofuel being moved is so energy dense, 
> easily stored, cleaner, etc.
>     The use of existing propane, natural gas, kerosene, etc stoves 
> will be killed only if the CPB fuels are cheaper - and this seems 
> likely eventually if not right now (according to the CPB website).
>     c.  I think liquid-fueled stoves are likely to prove much better 
> in all regards to all present wood-burning (including Rocket stoves) 
> re cost, air quality, efficiency, etc, if the assumptions above hold  
> (on time spent looking for fuel, etc).  This needs more analysis.
>     d.  Cooking using methane from biodigesters might be a close 
> call.  Those stoves are not generating the char that I find so 
> important, but putting char in digesters for "conditioning" seems very 
> promising.  The main difference could be in the perception of the time 
> being used each way.
>     e.  As to char-making stoves, the improvement is not so obvious 
> for rural cooks having plenty of wood, time, and need for char.  
> Regardless, it is better to have multiple options and there will be 
> many countries or parts of countries, that wouldn't see internal 
> generation of a carbon negative biofuel for a long time.  A huge 
> market therefore remains for char-making stoves.  And something may 
> not be correct in this initial review of what looks like a promising 
> addition to our list topic - cooking with biomass.
>
> 7.  So this is to request your reaction to pushing this different way 
> to promote Biochar production and use in family cooking in developing 
> countries.   I will forward your thoughts to CPB.   There could be 
> companies formed around this idea and I hope there are.  I won't be 
> doing so.    For me,  the basic question is whether more Biochar might 
> be put in the ground if cooking were done with liquids made from 
> biomass,  rather than cooking with that same biomass in any other type 
> of stove.
>
>    Ron
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *rongretlarson at comcast.net
> *To: *"Discussion of biomass" <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> *Cc: *hstokes at projectgaia.com
> *Sent: *Friday, August 10, 2012 12:26:24 PM
> *Subject: *[Stoves] Award for Harry Stokes
>
> List:
>
>    For a different reason that I will write on soon, I was searching 
> some (excellent) stove material on Harry's web site, and found notice 
> of his winning a prestigious bioenergy 2012 award.   See
>       
> http://www.projectgaia.com/blog/2012/06/06/pgi-executive-director-harry-stokes-selected-as-2012-world-bioenergy-award-winner/
>
>     I first met Harry at the (first in 2000?) stove conference in 
> Pune, India.  Harry's specialty - almost alone - is in pushing liquid 
> fuels (mostly ethanol and methanol) for cooking in developing 
> countries.  He is, of course, emphasizing those fuels from biomass 
> rather than fossil sources.  Look at his web site for some of the 
> projects now underway.
>
>    Congratulations to a well-deserving winner.
>
> Ron
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120811/6a726d56/attachment.html>