[Stoves] Efficiencies regarding wood, non-wood, and charcoal Re: Alternative to charcoal

[Paul Anderson]

Dear Crispin, Ron Larson, and Stovers with char interests,

Paul S. Anderson, PhD  aka "Dr TLUD"
Email:  psanders at ilstu.edu   Skype: paultlud  Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website:  www.drtlud.com

On 4/9/2013 12:18 AM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott wrote:
>
>  <snipped>
>
> If I put 1 kg of 15% moisture wattle (15.9 MJ/kg) into a TLUD stove 
> and create 20% char (20% of the moist mass) the net heat provided by 
> the fire is 10 MJ/kg. The heat available from the char is still 29.5 
> so the total is the difference the bit between: 15.9-10 = 5.9 MJ.
>
> If someone wants to switch from wood fuel to a 'cleaner' TLUD and that 
> TLUD is not 1.5 times as efficient in transferring heat, their raw 
> fuel consumption will increase.
>
>
The numbers are correct, but the language is biased.    "If...switch 
from WOOD fuel...,   their RAW fuel ..... "   How about saying
"If switch from wood fuel stove to a TLUD that does not need to use wood 
fuel, their wood fuel consumption could be eliminated."

Is the issue about WOOD or is it about efficiencies of devices (TLUDs) 
that leave charcoal behind?      Actually, both are important, but the 
norms of reporting of stove testing with biomass fuels are too 
intimately connected with wood because so many stoves are designed 
as*_only _*wood burners.

Let's stop criticizing or penalizing the TLUDs because they make 
charcoal.  And the new testing protocols/reports MUST have clarity of 
wording about efficiencies without the innuendo that TLUDs lack 
efficiency because wood (if used) is turned into charcoal.

Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20130410/7c863569/attachment.html>