[Stoves] New Handbook for Biomass Cookstove Research, Design, and Development

Wed Aug 16 18:14:04 CDT 2017

Dear all,

I think the initiative and effort to write about the state of stove R&D and research is great. We need to analyse, and provide simple and clear design advices to stove practitioners.

This handbook is supposed to show the current cookstove R&D state-of-the-art. But still, I think this is not the right picture.

Or at least it is only a small part of the right picture.

Many important researcher works and names are left out of this paper.

I can not imagine a paper claiming to describe recent R&D wook on cookstoves not mentioning Crispin Pemberton-Pigott nor his work even once. Not even one single time. He is simply absent of the document.

Dean Still, in the meantime, is mentioned 18 times.

No one on this list will deny what Crispin did and is doing for stove research, he has to be somewhere in the document.

I cannot understand that in August 2017 the MIT and GACC still publish, again, a document that, again, vouches for the WBT. p 7 in the « 1.3 PERFORMANCE TESTING » chapter, only the WBT is mentioned! How is that possible? What message are we conveying to new designers? What about the past conversations about the WBT since the beginning of the year? What about Ranyee admitting (like others do) that we have « moved beyond » the WBT?

How can people not think again that the GACC has actively worked to publicize and promote the WBT, at the detriment of all the other protocols?

As Samer mentioned in his message to Neeraja Penumetcha, this paper mentions almost uniquely U.S. stove researchers (p 4-5 of the document), at the detriment of all the other researchers. How can it remain silent about the astounding work from for example Europe, Central Asia, China, Indonesia? How can it not even mention the state-of-the-art topics that were discussed at length on this List?

Looking at the « TABLE 3: RECENT BIOMASS COOKSTOVE R&D PROJECTS THAT WERE SURVEYED FOR THIS REPORT » one can only note that all the organizations are from U.S.A. All of them. How can that not be considered like ethnocentricity?

Is the state-of-the-art in the cookstove sector the recycling of old and largely criticized work of the Aprovecho dating from 2007-2009?

ARC new products are mentioned many times (p 13, 18, 40, 41, 42). 

Other stove models, technologies, projects, research could, should have been mentioned, at least once, for example:

·         Servals TLUDs - India

·         Paul Olivier stoves - Vietnam

·         China-made improved cookstoves - China

·         Vesto and other New Dawn Engineering stoves - Swaziland

·         Rocket Works stoves, Adrian Padt - South Africa

·         Silverfire new line of stoves - U.S., China

·         Rebecca Vermeer, Eco-Kalan stoves - Philippines

·         Roger Samson, Mayon Turbo stove - South Africa

·         Practical Action, CHF stoves - Sudan

·         CSI Indonesia Pilot stoves - Indonesia

·         Prime and Dr Nurhuda stoves - Indonesia

·         Ecochina Stove - El Salvador

·         Anglo Supra Nova stove - Indonesia

·         University of Adelaïde papers - Australia

·         CSI project papers - Indonesia

·         DUE conference papers - South Africa

·         GERES project papers - South-East Asia

This list is not exhaustive.

Crispin says that his Vesto and Roger Samson’s stove both out-perform a Rocket stove quite handily, with the simmering ‘efficiency’ of a Vesto being above 65%.

I think unfortunately, this D-Lab handbook is misrepresenting to outsiders the actual current state of cookstove research.

I put Dan Sweeney in copy of this message. Dan, since you are a member of the Stove List as well, I put you in copy: your contributions would be most welcome.

Others on the list, your opinions would also help in this discussion.

Best regards,

Xavier

De : Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] De la part de Paul Anderson
Envoyé : mardi 1 août 2017 16:19
À : Discussion of biomass cooking stoves; Doc Anderson
Objet : Re: [Stoves] New Handbook for Biomass Cookstove Research, Design, and Development

Stovers,    (and placed on the   ePosts   at the  www.drtlud.com  website for easy access and wider audiences)

This new publication is definitely worth some of your time to download (free), save, and look at (at least scroll through and "read at your degree of interest").   Good diagrams, and very nice summaries of the issues of stove R&D and design.  

Download the full handbook here: http://cleancookstoves.org/resources/517.html 

Of course I focused on the TLUD issues.  
1.  No glaring errors were noted.  (Opps, one is noted when I wrote the content below).  

2.  There were some understatements that have background stories that would be too detailed for this publication.
Example is on Page# 22 (22 of 36 digital sheets).

FUEL BATCH SIZE AND RELOADING IN GASIFIER STOVES
Users of batch-fueled cookstoves like TLUDs often wish to continue cooking after the initial fuel 
batch has burned out. Adding new fuel to the stove causes it to switch from operating in a TLUD 
mode to a conventional updraft gasifier mode (Figure 15).

That part is true.  But then it goes on about Tryner's work at CSU with observed difficulties (correct) but does not say that that research put in a substantial amount of new fuel all at one time (a major cause of the difficulties).   

The continuing paragraph refers to Aprovecho results with a  TLUD-FA stove (incorrectly reference to the Reed-Larson 1996 article about TLUD-ND stoves)  and states that performace is not compromised when: 

the user can meter in additional fuel through the door in a low-power operating mode. 

Sorry, but in my opinion, there are serious compromises (some increase in emissions including when each new amount of fuel hits the top of the charcoal bed and shortening the stove life because of high temperatures from air directly blowing on hot charcoal in the bottom).  Therefore, this refueling is NOT good advice.   So, I would say that this is a glaring error that unfortunately will be repeated over and over, with citation to this publication.   But that is only my opinion.

3.  A few missed opportunities to make more complete statements:
    Example:  Page # 32 (34 of 36 digital sheets):

To achieve more turbulent flow without a fan, natural-draft cookstove designers have added features 
to the interior geometry that suddenly change the flow path and create turbulence in local 
mixing zones. 

Very true.   Then comes the example with a side-feed stick-burner stove (rocket type, but not showing the rocket fuel shelf;  in fact, I do  not recall seeing a full discussion of the true Rocket innovation by Winearski to have the air entering under the burning tips of the sticks).

For example, the Envirofit G-3300 has a choke ring, like a large metal washer, in the riser. The 
choke ring disturbs the flow of air and combustion gases and generates a local mixing zone 
(Figure 20) (DeFoort et al., 2010.

Then there is reference to Natural Draft TLUDs, but only the stationary vane that were pioneered by Kirk Harris (not mentioned) and attributed to Aprovecho.

What was not mentioned is the "concentrator"  (disk or plate) that does precisely the same thing as does a "choke ring"and it is the 
fundamental innovation of Wendelbo's Peko Pe TLUD (1990s) and Anderson's Champion TLUD (2005).  

I hope that others will send comments about this publication that is worthy of wide consideration by all "Stovers".

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 8/1/2017 6:36 AM, Neeraja Penumetcha wrote:

Biomass cookstove technology and performance have significantly improved over the last decade. Yet entrepreneurs and designers trying to build a better stove can still face a wide range of challenges. Design features that improve performance can come with higher production costs or usability challenges, for example. Enterprises often have limited resources for research and development, but must produce higher performing, usable, affordable technologies to stay competitive. R&D advancements that help balance these requirements are often not translated into practical guidance that is accessible to stove designers.

A new handbook aims to help designers and entrepreneurs by translating recent R&D advances into practical approaches for improving biomass cookstove performance, usability, and affordability. The Handbook for Biomass Cookstove Research, Design, and Development, was developed in partnership with MIT's D-Lab and the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves, with funding by UK aid from the UK government. Topics including ignition, air, fuel, mixing, and materials are covered through a synthesis of research findings and innovations from several different organizations. These components of the cooking process are all highly interrelated, so the handbook encourages consideration of these components together.

Download the full handbook here: http://cleancookstoves.org/resources/517.html

_______________________________________________
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/20170817/1b69839c/attachment.html>