[Stoves] Last? Alternative to Charcoal

Fri Apr 19 19:33:25 CDT 2013

Paul Means,

Rice hulls and rice straw are abundant in Asia, and in many areas they are
available for free or at very little cost. If we were to go about designing
a stove to exploit this abundant biomass, should we design a stove that
only produces heat? Or should we design a stove that produces both heat and
biochar?

If it can be demonstrated that the biochar produced by this stove greatly
enhances the growth of vegetables such as mustard greens, water spinach and
Chinese cabbage, then the by-product of cooking a meal acquires
considerable value. Every time someone cooks a meal with a stove that
produces biochar, this person would be earning money. It might not be a lot
of money relative to us, but believe me, it represents a lot of money for
the average Vietnamese, Cambodian or Laotian. The average household in
these three countries could produce up to a kg of biochar per day which,
already in this area, has a value of about 30 cents US. If funding agencies
were to invest heavily in the kind of biochar research that people such as
Reg Preston and Simon Shackley have been doing, then biochar would, no
doubt, acquire an even greater value.

One ton of rice hull pellets sells in Saigon for about $75 US. This one ton
of pellets produces about 330 kgs of biochar. This quantity of biochar has
a value of about $100 US. A biochar merchant could give pellets to an urban
household at zero cost in exchange for all of the biochar produced from
these pellets. This means that the urban household would have its fuel
free-of-charge.

In the case of a rural household where undensified rice hulls are abundant
and often free, the household could earn enough money through the sale of
biochar to pay for the cook stove within six months. In one year this
household could earn about $120 US, which in many cases here in Vietnam, is
far more than a monthly wage. If the cook stove is made out of high quality
stainless steel, then it would assure a steady and important stream of
income over many years.

So if we were to go about designing a stove to exploit the enormous
tonnages of biomass available in Asia, what should we do? If we design a
stove that only produces heat (with biochar being burned), when this heat
dissipates, there is nothing of value that remains. But if we design a
stove that produces both heat and biochar, a by-product of considerable
value remains, and once incorporated into the soil, it greatly enriches the
soil and stays there for a very long time.

I would urge funding agencies such as the GACC to pour big money into
biochar research throughout the whole of Asia, especially in those regions
where rice hulls, rice straw and other forms of agricultural biomass are
abundant. They should disseminate the results of this research to farmers
so that these farmers might understand the considerable value of biochar
when incorporated into the soil or fed to animals.

Biochar could easily be the driving force behind everything related to the
financially sustainable production and sale of cook stoves in a given area.

Thanks.
Paul Olivier

On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 7:17 AM, Paul Means <paul at burndesignlab.org> wrote:

> Hi Crispin,
> In answer to your questions.  I assumed that the cost of transportation,
> for bulk products like this will primarily be based on weight rather than
> volume.  Therefore, in my analysis, the relative costs for transporting
> each of the different fuels is simply the product of:
>
>  1. the relative energy density (MJ/KG)
>  multiplied by
>  2. the relative haul distance.(KM/MJ) to pick up a MJ of fuel.
>
>   Sized & dried biomass (whether pellets, crumbled wood, dried chips,
> sticks, etc) has only 59% of the energy density of charcoal. On the other
> hand, the relative haul distance for traditional charcoal, because the
> process is so inefficient and it consequently has to be hauled from a much
> wider area, is 3 times more than for sized & dried biomass.
>
> For the "alternative to charcoal" I assume that the market for this fuel
> being brought into the cities is developed on the basis of modern/new
> micro-gasifier / TLUD type stoves.  It's assumed that the char is either
> burned in the TLUD (a few designs are coming out with this now) or the char
> is burned in a separate stove.  I have assumed that this TLUD / Char
> Burning together has an overall efficiency of 40%.
>
> - Paul
>
> Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 11:22:53 +0000
> From: crispinpigott at gmail.com
> To: "Stoves" <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Alternatives to charcoal - transportation &
>         biochar
> Message-ID:
>         <798760741-1366284175-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.
> net-357301314- at b5.c10.bise6.blackberry>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> Dear Paul M
>
> Could you please clarify two things (I can't see the slides. I am in
> transit).
>
> Are you basing the transport on a volume basis on the assumption that a
> vehicle bearing a higher density fuel can carry more?  Someone was talking
> like that.
>
> Next, I think you can (very) safely assume that any charcoal stove will
> deliver 1.5 times as much heat per available MJ into a pot. I aim higher
> than that but let's stick to average mediocre wood and charcoal stoves. A
> pretty ordinary charcoal stove will deliver 40% of the energy available to
> the pot.
>
> I don't know how that affects the outcome but it is the reality re the
> processed v.s. unprocessed fuels (char vs wood).
>
> Thanks
> Crispin
> Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network
>
> --
> Paul M. Means
> Research & Testing Manager
> Burn Design Lab
> (253) 569-2976 (mobile)
> http://www.burndesignlab.org/
> “In the whole of world history there is always only one really significant
> hour – the present…If you want to find eternity, you must serve the times.”
> * - *Dietrich Bonhoeffer
>
> www.burndesignlab.org <http://www.burndesignlab.org./>*.*
>
> *This e-mail and any attachment contain information which is private and
> confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you are not an
> addressee, you are not authorized to read, copy or use this e-mail or any
> attachment. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
> sender by return e-mail and then destroy it.  *
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
>
>
>

-- 
Paul A. Olivier PhD
26/5 Phu Dong Thien Vuong
Dalat
Vietnam

Louisiana telephone: 1-337-447-4124 (rings Vietnam)
Mobile: 090-694-1573 (in Vietnam)
Skype address: Xpolivier
http://www.esrla.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20130420/92c818cd/attachment.html>