[Stoves] Comparing the fate of fuel energy between stoves -- a simple table?

Julien Winter winter.julien at gmail.com
Fri Jul 19 08:07:40 CDT 2013


Hello Stovers;

I am in Dhaka, Bangladesh, and I am going into a meeting in a couple
of days to talk about biochar production through cookstoves.  I have
already been asked a question about whether biochar-making is a cost
(in fuel) that stove-user may not want to make.  For example, "why not
burn the fuel to ash and not save the biochar?"  ... to which I reply
that for a ND-TLUD, 70% of the fuel energy was in the gas fire, and
the carbon fire is a long way from the pot, and a TLUD is a great deal
more efficient that a traditional stove, and who would want a high
temperature carbon fire at the bottom of one's cherished stove anyway.

I realize that there are some huge ceteris paribus assumptions to be
made about standard conditions for comparing different stove types and
fuels, but can anybody have a crack at filling in this "simple" table?
 I just want some ballpark figures to help justify biocharmakery.

FATE OF THE ENERGY CONTAINED IN A WOOD FUEL

STOVE_TYPE        COOKING          BIOCHAR          LOST
============================================
                             ----------------------- (%)
-----------------------------
1) ND-TLUD
2) 3-stone
3) Anila
4) Chula
5) etc.

I have just put in some stove names as examples.  The value for
%energy in biochar is zero for many stoves, so many comparisons
amounts to a comparison of stove efficiencies.

As must be the case for many less well off countries, the most
ecologically sound method of making biochar in Bangladesh will be
through their cookstoves, and the biggest, most immediate impact of
biochar on people's lives will be to improve the fertility of
homestead gardens.  That is easy to say; it will be a lot harder to
do.

Thanks,
Julien.

-- 
Julien Winter
Cobourg, ON, CANADA




More information about the Stoves mailing list