[Stoves] cook stoves for Cameroon

[Crispin Pemberton-Pigott]

Thanks Paul for the clarification and opportunities. In many places saving a bit of firewood is not a priority‎, much as we fuel-parsimonious fanatics would prefer.

Regards
Crispin
From: Paul Anderson
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 09:55
To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
Reply To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
Subject: Re: [Stoves] cook stoves for Cameroon


Huck,

Crispin wrote:
> Thus 'gasifiers' are getting rated as if they do not consume fuel that
> is actually consumed.
Crispin's point is that wood that is turned into charcoal is no longer
wood.   THAT is true.    But there are two ways to state the
efficiency:    Fuel efficiency and Energy efficiency. Charcoal that is
created is no longer wood.   But it is a fuel made from wood that was
transformed.    And it typically represent 25% to 35% of the energy that
is in the dry weight of the wood.

You indicated that the area is reasonably wooded.   So it is not a case
of scarcity of wood.

If the created charcoal is put into the soil as biochar, then that
energy content is no longer available.

You as the project leader and with your personnel can make the decision
about how to read the numbers in the reports on stove efficiency (of
fuel or of energy).

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 9/15/2014 10:45 PM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott wrote:
>
> Dear Huck
>
> Just one quick point:
>
> "The gasifier, as I understand it, is more efficient and has lower
> emissions."
>
> It depends on the test method and the metrics. It is fashionable to
> use the GACC-WBT and that test does not report fuel consumption, it
> reports the fuel mass equivalent of the energy consumption, treating
> charcoal left over as unburned raw fuel (meaning it says the wood was
> not consumed).
>
> Thus 'gasifiers' are getting rated as if they do not consume fuel that
> is actually consumed. When you assess the performance be sure you are
> clear on how the method calculates performance and what the metrics
> are. You may want to measure ( and weigh) fuel needed per cooking
> cycle rather than use any calculated numbers from a complex test protocol.
>
> For evaluation of performance I recommend the CSI-WHT which is a water
> heating test (no boiling) and a measure of the raw fuel needed per
> replication of the cooing cycle. It is used by the WB in the Clean
> Stove Initiative in Indonesia. Documentation (some anyway) is available.
>
> Regards
>
> Crispin in Tamil Naidu
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140916/05ec1dce/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
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/