[Stoves] Commercial application of smoke? (Re: Crispin, Ron)

[Crispin Pemberton-Pigott]

Dear Nikhil

 

The low smoke-level fish produced in a modern manner involve drying the fish first in a low or very low smoke environment, then adding smoky flavour afterwards. This latter action takes place at a low temperature.

 

Investigations on Ghana earlier this year showed clearly that holding the processing temperature below 105 C prevented the oils in the fish from rising much about 85 and resulted in PAH(4) levels there were either undetectable or 1 part per billion. This was not a ‘modern’ approach. It was done using a wood fire and an air-gas mixing chamber that preceded the drying chamber. With a clean fire and adequate air mixed in, the temperature in the chamber was not able to get above 120 C. 

 

In one case the fish were so clean they looked fresh, but were in fact dried. At that stage we had to consider how to add smoke in a separate operation or in the same chamber but at the end of the cycle.

 

This demonstrates that smoke flavour can be added using liquid smoke, and that the same result can be obtained using very clean combustion plus added smoke, or that it can be achieved using a new form of dryer that permits full control over the processing temperature and the ‘smokiness’ of the fire at the end.

 

Not every one of the PAH(4) content was very dependent on the smoke, actually, which surprised me. It was far more likely that the Benzo(a)pyrene was dependent on temperature, and 2 of the other 3 dependent on actual smokiness. Not sure about the last one. Maybe a bit of both.

 

I am pretty sure I will never add ‘liquid smoke’ to anything I eat. I totally do not trust that it is safe. Smoke can contain horrible organic compounds so the cleaner the better. Burn the lot.

 

Thanks for highlighting

Crispin

 

 

 

 

I remember some exchanges between Crispin and some others about tar formation in chimneys.  I also remember Ron and Paul discussing biochar. 

The story below mentions stove pipes; I suppose that is for large metal stoves, not exhaust as such. But I wonder if there are commercial applications of smoke.

Liquid Smoke: The History Behind a Divisive Culinary Shortcut <http://www.eater.com/2016/6/15/11945944/liquid-smoke-what-is-it> , Matthew Sedacca, Eater.com, 15 June 2016.

I think stove designs that capture the smoke within tubes should earn some health credits and avoided black carbon GHG credits anyway. If liquid smoke qualifies under biochar - i.e., it can be used for plant growth - then there will be biochar credits for GHG avoidance, health benefits of soil productivity increase. With a million dollars, any model can be tweaked. 

Hello, EPA? Is liquid smoke carbon sequestration?

Can collected smoke - dry or liquid - be purified for industrial uses of carbon? I tinkered with coke and metal products industry decades ago. 

It's not the emissions but where they go how, that is the question. 

To EPA or not EPA. 

Nikhil

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160908/c1a590ee/attachment.html>