[Stoves] FW: Biomass briquetting tangents

icecool icecool at qanet.gm
Mon Aug 14 04:28:36 CDT 2017


 

 

From: icecool [mailto:icecool at qanet.gm] 
Sent: 13 August 2017 15:06
To: 'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves'
Cc: 'Crispin Pemberton-Pigott'; 'Nikhil Desai'
Subject: RE: [Stoves] Biomass briquetting tangents

 

Crispin, Nikhil, list,

 

Sun just came out so been digging out just a few papers – attached.

 

1 baseline and test stove comparison – simple version.

2 A very basic business plan projection over 10 years highlighting wood, money and CO2 savings.

3 Another basic business plan showing cumulative savings over a 5 year period

4 test burning using one of the imported trial stoves and briquettes

5 SE4ALL concept note

 

Nikhil!

 

I know you love the irony of life!

You asked: 2. Is there an evaluation of the Gambia stoves work in the past?

Quick example. We are involved in a Green Wall project (issues with this are the reason for our tin of sardine syndrome). One of the activities under the Department of Forestry is stoves for households. No, NOT ours. They included the promotion of what we call the Kumba Gaye stove – a 3stone with a mud skirt stationary construction. Attached (renewable Energy study 2006) excerpts from papers I found saying this stove is c..p 10 YEARS ago. Even the Peace Corps stopped promoting this! So – everybody knows that but….

 

Have fun

 

George

 

 

 

From: Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of icecool
Sent: 13 August 2017 14:09
To: 'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves'
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Biomass briquetting tangents

 

Dear Crispin, Nikhil and list,

 

I am working off ONE solar battery with heavy rains so not much computer time or juice. Please apologise my shortness.

 

At the time we, on a local level with Crispin’s and Cecil’s input, made the choice to try to bring a better stove to market and tackle the 75% unemployment another time. The pilot was small and we did a lot for little money – but we learned a lot.

 

Local – I agree with Crispin. We wanted a GOOD stove and we did it. It was able to burg charcoal, wood and briquettes or other biomass big enough to not fall through the holes. The tech institute here is struggling with tooling – they have a few guillotines but use mainly tin snips – breaks your heart to watch them TRYING. In the end the fund holder (CU) did NOT advance finance the production of the 500 stoves – the sale was supposed to generate the return – any profit was supposed to start the slow rollout batch by batch.

 

Savings – we did some extensive monitoring with the 24 trial stoves imported from SA (23 left now – 1 uncaring householder). Fuel cost savings achieved around 60% to 3stone or local stoves. Time saving around 30%. WB sent a pollution monitoring team – never shared their findings J GREAT for the guys on the ground and in the workshops!!! People who use the 23 stoves are our best friends and think it’s the best thing since…

 

SE4ALL – official facts for The Gambia here https://www.se4all-africa.org/se4all-in-africa/country-data/gambia/  and here http://www.se4all.ecreee.org/content/gambia . Our concept note was classified under renewable I think. But yes, emphasis was on electrics. 

 

Where is SE4ALL? I used to have real good contacts just about everywhere. After the population de-elected the old dictator and ECOWAS troops made sure he left at the beginning of this year, many officials are not where they used to be. Much shuffling has taken place, huge disruption to ongoing projects as a big internal scrutiny exercise is still trying to find the people who have been eating much of the money. At the time of the validation workshop I think the idea was to put a reasonable prospectus for investment together (including our initiatives), then start looking for funding?

 

On a personal level, I have not been in a position to network much for quite some time now – economics have been real tough, hence the daily tin of sardines. But by the end of this month things will improve so I will be hitting the road again – and the offices. Be sure of this!

 

Onwards

 

George in his personal compound jungle J

 

From: Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
Sent: 13 August 2017 13:20
To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Biomass briquetting tangents

 

Dear Nikhil the persistent

 

My analysis and actions are rooted in some fundamental concepts that underlie the approach to project design. 

 

It is often a desire to 'make a stove locally'. As Mark Bryden's students have shown, there isn't enough scrap metal in Chad to replace all the traditional stoves with much better ones. Even if it were all making it to the bazaar and not being exported ‎to China, it is not nearly enough. Generally the better stoves all have more material in them. 

 

So what does 'produced locally' mean? They produce their own steel sheets? ‎Nope. Rivets? Sort of, made from chopped off nails. Screws? No. Welding rods? No. Bolts? No. 

 

The point is that nearly no stove made from metal is entirely produce in-country. So, who decided that ‎cutting up an imported sheet is 'local'? Why not import the blanked parts, accurately made and mass produced? Why ship scrap to Chad and start cutting with a hammer and cold chisel? Makes no sense, as soon as one admits that the material is going to be imported if the 'problem' is to be addressed 'at scale'. 

 

The idea we explored with George was to try to get a finished combustion chamber, material and processing, to Gambia for the same cost as buying the raw material locally. Given the rapacious nature of the local importers, invariably expats from the Middle East and South Asia, this was not such a challenge. 

 

As to its being 'affordable' that is a question of the value proposition, not only the cost. As the stove lasts five years, it has additional value as a purchase proposition. As a fuel saver, it is also more valuable. For lighting speed it is probably unrivaled. Big plus. Less smoke? More benefit. Fuel flexible? Yup. So it is a 'good value' because the value proposition exceeds the cost. 

 

Accessibility is a separate issue. If the amount is too big to pay all at once, it needs a finance mechanism and there are lots to invoke. 

 

So I agree that the definition of 'local' is a political decision. ‎If you are going to send anything to a developing country, don't include any embedded low skilled labour. Do that on site. 

 

We had a discussion here some years ago on how to create the most stoves with the best performance at the least cost at the greatest speed.  ‎One proposal was to send Vesto combustion chambers with an additional  ring to hold it, and ti build a mud enclosure that created the preheating chambers and cooking platform. 

 

This is what happened with George except instead of mud he used locally available plain steel sheets which are common enough. 

 

GIZ was not involved in the project, it was a WB pilot with Concern International. Cecil did the stove anthropology, as usual. 

 

Local production was done with the mech tech teaching institute which had the necessary metal working tools. It was not artisanal. ‎It was the first time we tried to make Vestos outside the SA region. Sujatha at Servals in Chennai has made some from scratch and confirmed the high-end performance. It still hasn't appeared in any stove performance report from Aprovecho or EPA through they have each had one for years. Obviously it didn't get a mention by D-Lab either. 

 

NIH??

 

Regards 

Crispin 

 

Crispin: (to George below)

What you describe of Gadgil's - and your - work is yesteryear's. And probably for very unorthodox situations (Darfur) or small markets (Vesto in the Gambia). 

Conditions change. Electricity, skills, manufacturing capacity, restriction on imports (or preference for domestic production), availability of tools, Mrs. Clinton's enthusiasm and ISO globalism. As do the demographics (urbanization), resource availability (waste biomass)

My point is that "appropriate technology" of yesteryears need not be the same today. The key idea you and Gadgil had was that "the ‘industrial’ production was done as close to the bulk material source where the tooling could be produced and maintained." 

This remains valid, and is a very useful parameter for defining "context", the term I am obsessed with (at least in reaction to service standard and objective). Your recommendation also remain valid for such contexts: 

" *   Designed outside the region
  *   Introduced after local testing
  *   Main components needing high precision produced outside the country
  *   All metal construction
  *   Performance much better than local baseline products in common use
  *   Production process adjusted/evolved as local capacity improved
  *   Field performance evaluations confirm acceptance and long term use (displacement)

It would be good if the project can be picked up again and expanded to include all the city neighbourhoods."

 

In other contexts, "Design outside the region" and "all metal construction" need not apply, and "country" is simply a political term. 

These are the "data shortages" in the facts-free universe of "clean cookstoves" - data are contextual and there is not a single database I can find about the local, real facts of alleged global problems - deforestation, climate change, women's power, or health damage. (Conversely, not a single "stove rollout" has been done on the basis of actual local data on "before and after" efficiency, emissions, women's power, or long-term health.) 

The question is, why did GIZ effort limited in time and geography? How much damage has been done by the madness of pushing WBT and ISO Tiers? (Maybe not much; GACC increasingly looks like a sideshow.) 

I will now read the D-Lab report in light of your observations. 

George: 

Some questions: 

1. Who is leading the external charge on SE4All when it comes to cooking energy? Is the emphasis only on households? This is important because if SE4All is aligned with UN SDGs, the goal is to reduce the "% of households using solid fuels for cooking". 

In other words, SDGs are as pernicious to use of biomass for cooking as WHO/ISO Tier 4 Emission Reduction Targets for PM2.5 (hourly average). I do not understand why this List has not reacted to this blatant betrayal of the "better biomass stoves" agenda. 

2. Is there an evaluation of the Gambia stoves work in the past? And to the SE4All Investment Prospectus (likely to be heavily weighed to electricity)? 

------

Thanks, both. A breath of fresh air. 

Nikhil

 

 




------------------------------------------------------------------------ 

 

On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 10:32 PM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com> wrote:

Dear George of the J

Thanks. The follow-up point I want to make is stimulated by the fact that your project was discussed previously and it has some aspects which interesting to those planning stove roll-outs in locations where the are manufacturing capacity or skill shortages.

Quick review: at about the same time, Ashok Gadgil and I concluded that the way forward in places with limited manufacturing capacity was to send partially manufactured stoves to the site, absent only what could be made using the available skills and manpower. By ‘concluded’ I mean we both started ‘doing it’, Ashok in Darfur and you with me in the Gambia. At the time Ashok and I have not met or communicated – we only found each other later and got on like a house on fire.

While it has probably been done before, we didn’t have examples. The plan was to make the combustion chambers for Vesto stoves and send them to you, with all the rest of the stove made locally from available sheet metal. The result was a locally fabricated Vesto Junior that has the same performance as a product made in Swaziland.

Ashok for his part, produced ‘blanked’ parts in India and sent them to Darfur for assemble in a workshop that had no electricity – just hand tools, initially. Later they added some welding to further improve the product.

The common elements were that the ‘industrial’ production was done as close to the bulk material source where the tooling could be produced and maintained. In the case of the Darfur stove it was blanking tools. For those who don’t know the term, it is punching tools that typically have a very small vertical movement, used to create a shape out of a flat sheet. It can also be done by laser or plasma cutter, but when volume is involved, press tools are made that punch the whole part at once at very low cost. There was no way that could be run and maintained in Darfur.

With Banjul, the challenge was similar. There is a mechanical training centre with limited cutting and welding facility but no laser cutting or CNC punching capability. The grate on the Vesto needs three press tools to make, including a complicated blanking tool. So the combustion chamber with scores of holes and the grate were produced in Johannesburg – at the contractor that does the CNC work and the SeTAR Centre’s stove development workshop at the University of Johannesburg. That facility was equipped by ProBEC/GIZ in its last days.

At the time the goal in the Gambia was to produce locally a high performance stove that could burn briquettes made for available waste materials, which is a fuel a Vesto is able deal with quite well. The initial target was to make it to last five years, and it is heartening to hear that indeed these stoves have endured that long. Given that there is no ceramic component in them, perhaps designers can learn from the experiment. It is an all-metal stove like the Darfur Stove.  They two products have little else in common as to how they work, but they do share these:


  *   Designed outside the region
  *   Introduced after local testing
  *   Main components needing high precision produced outside the country
  *   All metal construction
  *   Performance much better than local baseline products in common use
  *   Production process adjusted/evolved as local capacity improved
  *   Field performance evaluations confirm acceptance and long term use (displacement)

It would be good if the project can be picked up again and expanded to include all the city neighbourhoods.

Many thanks
Crispin



Crispin.

Sorry my mistake. Maybe of interest to a wider audience. Even way back I always thought that your stove designs never got enough mention. Feedback from the grassroots. After the rains hopefully our economic situation has improved enough so we can go back to the 23 families and do a quick survey.

George


From: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott [mailto:crispinpigott at outlook.com]
Sent: 12 August 2017 17:57
To: icecool; George Riegg Gambia
Subject: RE: [Stoves] Biomass briquetting tangents

Did you want this to go to the Discussion list?

I’d be happy to respond there.
Crispin


Nikhil and Crispin,

Ebola only affected us here economically. Total collapse of tourism, still trying to recover now. At the time restricted movements of goods as borders were almost closed for some months – high prices for scarce products. We laid in boxes of tinned sardines and other tinned stuff and went into lock down mode for about 3 month – only fresh daily bread. In the end I think they traced the virus back to some monkeys in Niger or there abouts – yes bush meet played a big part and the eradication of forests…

Crispin. Our 23 Furno Ees are still working great for the “test” families – nearly 5 years on. 2 ½ years ago we had a SE4ALL validation workshop here and both the Furno and the Briquetting were included in the Governments priority initiatives and the Investment Prospectus. Now with the new people in Government hopefully more positive actions will happen in time. We also had some serious funding problems with getting messed around by some implementing partners in charge of purse strings – we never made it away from the 1 tin of sardines per day. Amazing what you can do with that!

Watch this space ☺ There is still spank in this old geezer!

George 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170814/98c7a526/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: stove baseline-test comparison July12 PRSP.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 33704 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170814/98c7a526/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ESS production calcs 10yrs.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 24666 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170814/98c7a526/attachment-0001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Furno EES with bio-mass burning July12.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 473374 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170814/98c7a526/attachment-0002.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CU WB stove savings calculations July12.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 21498 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170814/98c7a526/attachment-0003.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Concept Note for SE4ALL, The Gambia - PRSP, Fuel Efficient Stoves.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 932437 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170814/98c7a526/attachment-0004.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Renewable Energy Study 2006.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 15645 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170814/98c7a526/attachment.docx>


More information about the Stoves mailing list