[Stoves] Cuber and size of densifying machines. (no longer Re: The wood and char and fuel "debate" )
Paul Anderson
psanders at ilstu.edu
Thu Mar 6 09:02:35 CST 2014
Dear Stovers and other Friends,
I am in agreement with Bjarne. It appears (yet still to be totally
proven) that the larger diameter (such as 60 mm = 2.3 inches)
*_densified _*biomass is probably a better way to proceed into larger
production with mechanization in the developing societies.
Note that "densified" is with higher compression (including the crushing
of cell structures and the "melting" of lignin that gives the glossy
outer coating on DENSIFIED pellets and "processed logs" or densified
briquettes).
Note: IMO, the term "briquette" is used differently by various people
who do not distinguish between the high-density and the low-density
briquettes and the processes to make them.
Similarly, there can be high and low density "pucks" or disks or
wedges. Maybe HD and LD can be used to distinguish between the two
main types.
For example, LD briquettes and pucks are made with manual presses and
jacks for lifting vehicles. These LD processed fuels can also be great
as fuel (especially for TLUD gasifiers) if that is what the budget and
circumstances allow for production. Bjarne and I are NOT commenting
against the LD precessed fuels. We are commenting about the HD
processed fuels, and are stating that the larger (60mm) diameter fuels
are probably the more practical (lower cost and less maintenance) way to
make HD processed biomass fuels. Clearly pellets (HD and about 6 to 8
mm diameter) have an important role and are commercially viable, but
that is in the context of developed and affluent societies.
As I have commented before, when the HD processed biomass "log" is
extruded by a ram press (not by an auger), the log is essentially a
series of disks that are jammed together. The disks come out hot and
slide along a cooking rack perhaps 5 meters long. And while still hot
(meaning closer to the press), they can be gently tapped and they will
break apart into very clean disks measuring about 60 mm diameter and 10
to 15 mm thick. If the fuel user needs smaller pieces at the time to
cooking the meal, the disks can be easily broken by hand or hit with a
rock or piece of log to become halves and quarters. For Awamu in
Uganda, two different makers of HD "logs" have provided us with disks
when requested.
Also stated in earlier messages, inside a TLUD gasifier, the disks can
be place vertically (on edge) and have a superior air flow than if they
are placed horizontally.
Comments in support or contrary would be greatly appreciated.
Paul
Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email: psanders at ilstu.edu
Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website: www.drtlud.com
On 3/6/2014 1:32 AM, Bjarne Laustsen wrote:
> To Paul and others
> Fuel supply can be big business but it does not need to be.
> We have been making pellets for gasification stoves.
> The pellets in itself work very well if they are in sizes from 6 mm or
> 8 mm in diameter, they have been burning very good in our gasification
> stoves.
> The problems in relation with pellets for gasification stoves are how
> to find good and sustainable pellet presses for producing the pellets.
> The slides from the presentation from Crane Wang MUYANG illustrate
> this very well. Because the pellet press they shows are big and
> expensive equipments that will do a good job, however they are outside
> the financial reach of most of us.
> We have experiences with some of the smaller and cheaper pellets
> mills, and they are not able to produce pellets in a sustainable way.
> They are designed for feed pellet production, and they aretherefore
> not able to produce fuel pellets in an economical way.
>
> I have noted that in China they are mainly working with pellets for
> fuel production while in India they are working with briquettes.
>
> For me to see the cuber will still be an to expensive solution.
>
> The solution for us will be to use the Indian type of mechanical
> piston briquette presses that can make briquettes with diameter of 60
> mm and get attached a puck cutter on that so the briquettes are cut
> out in pucks. Such pucks will be a good fuel for gasification stoves.
> And the equipment is reasonable in price so it is possible for many to
> finance such a solution.
>
> These briquette presses can work with most types of agricultural
> residues, so we at the same can shift to using renewable biomass for
> cooking and in this way also contribute to reducing the deforestation.
>
> Bjarne Laustsen
>
> On 3/5/2014 10:47 PM, Paul Anderson wrote:
>> Stovers,
>>
>> Slide #9 of the presentation at the site given below is
>> interesting. Those cubes should work very well in gasifiers of many
>> different sizes.
>>
>> I was impressed by the other slides that show the very large sizes of
>> the pelletizers and cubers. If supply of raw materials is
>> sufficient, large machines seem so much more appropriate than 100 or
>> 1000 small units. Fuel supply is BIG business.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
>> Email: psanders at ilstu.edu
>> Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
>> Website: www.drtlud.com
>>
>> On 3/5/2014 9:58 AM, Energies Naturals C.B. wrote:
>>> Hello Michael,
>>>
>>> .....
>>>
>>> We saw some examples of cubers in a Beijing(?) stove exposition some
>>> time ago.
>>>
>>> Also check this:
>>> http://www.novator.se/bioint/BPUA12Pres/10_BPUA12_Crane_Wang_MUYANG.pdf
>>>
>>> Hope this helps
>>>
>>> Rolf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 10:36:47 -0600
>>> Michael Mahowald <memahowald at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You are absolutely correct Paul !
>>>> Deforestation happens all over the world with the lack of fire wood.
>>>> There simply is not enough dry sources of trees or waste from them
>>>> even for TLUD's to keep even poor consumers interested in them.
>>>> We know vetiver grass has the highest photosynthetic activity of
>>>> any plant, making it the most renewable energy source on the
>>>> planet. We just have to densify the grass into pellets at a cost
>>>> that people can afford. The only way we can do this is to
>>>> eliminate the cost of diesel fuel to run the generator to make the
>>>> pellets.
>>>> We are planning on using a downdraft gasifier for gas to accomplish
>>>> this. We just have to perfect this process and size it for a
>>>> portable pelleting plant that can be taken to the fields they grow it.
>>>> When we perfect this it will be capable to work everywhere in the
>>>> world that needs clean cook stoves.
>>>> If you want to see what we are doing check out
>>>> http://haitireconstruction.ning.com/page/grass-energy
>>>> and
>>>> http://haitireconstruction.ning.com/page/sustainable-path-on-how-to
>>>>
>>>> Michael E. MahowaldPresident
>>>> Haiti Reconstruction International952-220-6814
>>>>
>>>> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 20:43:31 -0600
>>>> From: psanders at ilstu.edu
>>>> To: stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org; biochar at yahoogroups.com
>>>> Subject: [Stoves] The wood and char and fuel "debate" (was a long
>>>> time ago called Re: Request for technology proposals - Clean Stove
>>>> Initiative, Indonesia)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear Crispin, Ron and all,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is interesting reading the back and forth between Ron and
>>>> Crispin. I emphasize two paragraphs from Crispin,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/24/2014 10:10 AM, Crispin Pembert-Pigott wrote:
>>>>
>>>> There
>>>> is no dispute between us whatsoever as to the energy
>>>> consumption: the energy remaining in the char represents
>>>> energy not liberated from the fuel consumed.
>>>> The
>>>> important question is not what we want, but what the
>>>> customer of the test result wants. They are not asking
>>>> how
>>>> much energy was used when cooking, they asked how much
>>>> fuel
>>>> was consumed. The answer is of course different if
>>>> there is
>>>> char remaining and that char is not ‘fuel’ to the same
>>>> stove
>>>> for the next fire.
>>>> For the vast majority of "customers"
>>>> (including governments that
>>>> want to reduce or reverse deforestation), the important
>>>> question is
>>>> "how much wood is burned." The interests are highly related to
>>>> WOOD, specifically related to TREES, not even counting sawdust
>>>> that
>>>> goes into pellets.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, because TLUD stoves are VERY GOOD at burning NON-wood
>>>> biomass,
>>>> the wood saved can be 100%. And we still get the char.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Concerning fuel and wood and non-wood and char and other such
>>>> measurements, the real problems can come from rankings and
>>>> Tiers and
>>>> o
>>>> ther reports that could give excellent stoves some poor results
>>>> because the "authorities" are defining fuel as being exclusively
>>>> wood, as in trees and woodlands that need to be protected.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If we could get past that "imposed intellectual construct" of
>>>> fuel
>>>> being wood, we could make more progress about some types of
>>>> biomass
>>>> stoves being even better than good for the environment.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rest assured that the advocates of alcohol and kerosene and other
>>>> NON-biomass fuels are pointing out that their stoves help
>>>> minimize
>>>> deforestation/enviromental degradation.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Biomass that is NOT WOOD needs to be recognized as being
>>>> favorable
>>>> for saving trees, and credit given to the stoves that can use
>>>> those
>>>> non-wood biomass fuels.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> AND that recognition and credit needs to be EXPLICITLY STATED
>>>> IN THE
>>>> REPORTS ABOUT FUEL CONSUMPTION.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In some ways, this is all just another discussion about why the
>>>> reported results of any stove testing need much explanation
>>>> (which
>>>> is usually not provided) and why the results are so easy to
>>>> ignore
>>>> as being poorly related to the realities of people and their
>>>> stoves
>>>> and their fuels.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I hope we can do better in the future.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>> (still another week to go on my vacation trip to Brazil,
>>>> so I probably will not be sending replies.)
>>>>
>>>> Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
>>>> Email: psanders at ilstu.edu
>>>> Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
>>>> Website: www.drtlud.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20140306/2858f405/attachment.html>
More information about the Stoves
mailing list