[Stoves] Comparison fuel consumption

[Nikhil Desai]

Crispin:

Just why is "emissions per kg burned or per MJ delivered to the pot"
relevant?

What matters is exposure profiles - presence in certain concentrations over
the course of a day or a week or a month or a year.

Perhaps. In fact, there is very little we know about emission rates,
concentrations, exposures, and disease incidence for different
age/sex/ethnic profiles in different parts of the world.

I grant "emissions per kg burned" is a better metric than average hourly
emission rates and loads for four-hour cooking periods assumed. But fuel
chemistry, combustion chemistry, and air chemistry of the cooking area,
surroundings, and everywhere else the person in question moves around,
cannot be modeled in realistic circumstances for all contexts.

Contextual, not general, analysis helps design usable stoves. Your
reference to higher efficiency stove with doubled emissions is relevant
only for burning in closed areas and bad chimneys. I wonder how many such
stoves were used. From what I recall for India, people abandoned high-smoke
stoves, fuel savings notwithstanding.

Nikhil

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nikhil Desai
(India +91) 909 995 2080
*Skype: nikhildesai888*


On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <
crispinpigott at outlook.com> wrote:

> Dear Dieter
>
> Does the Ben Stove have lower emissions per kg burned or per MJ delivered
> to the pot?
>
> I want to consider how the emissions are reduced. While one can say,
> 'because it burns less wood the emissions are proportionally reduced' the
> reality is I expect that the reduction should be much more than that.
>
> If it burns half the wood with half the emissions per kg then the
> emissions are 1/4. I speak here of course with reference to CO and PM.
>
> I have seen, on the other hand, ‎seen stoves that saved fuel but doubled
> the emissions. I presume that is not the case with the Ben Stove.
>
> Thanks
> Crispin
>
> Dear all,
>
> Please find attached a picture for comparison of fuelwood consumption of
> traditional Three Stone Fire and Ben Stove. The picture illustrates the
> savings with ICS and cooking with retained heat. Of course besides the
> savings of fuel there are corresponding savings of emissions and burdens.
>
> Kind regards,
> Dieter
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> Virenfrei.
> www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
> <#m_-3292271456176806604_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170416/0bb6fba1/attachment.html>