[Stoves] TLUD stove is fragile, traditional stove is robust, no stove is antifragile

Sat Dec 2 21:14:25 CST 2017

Dear Dr,
I was just thinking the case in India ( I had thought the number is 1,1000)
, that evidence is very strong. In my case, I have suffered one gas poison.
dizzy and paralyzed a little bit for 10 hrs, I only use TLUD less than 1
month, many times big smoke go out from my window, my neighbor is very nice
not calling the police. I can't imagine how a housewife deal with the hard
situation, maybe DIY is not a good idea.

regards

2017-12-03 10:47 GMT+08:00 Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu>:

> Cheng,    see below
>
> Doc  /  Dr TLUD  /  Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
> Email:  psanders at ilstu.edu
> Skype:   paultlud    Phone: +1-309-452-7072 <(309)%20452-7072>
> Website:  www.drtlud.com
>
> On 12/2/2017 7:48 PM, lh cheng wrote:
>
> TLUD stove is efficient but fragile. this fragile concept comes from a
> book "Antifragile", written by Nassim Nicholas Taleb, like Dr Anderson, he
> is a Doctor and professor. He have a good understanding of man-made
> artificial system, have deep insight of the weakness of some man-made
> system, and he find a good way to make money (of no small amount ) through
> it from financial market.
>
> Fragile thing like Titanic ship, is high efficient, beautiful, but there
> were big risks, which cannot be avoided anyway, underneath the surface,
> when something wrong happened eventually, inevitably, no one can afford it.
>
> I criticize TLUD stove here, not in malice, but try to make something
> clear, maybe we can find out the hindrance of its popularity, find a
> direction to improve it, and help the user to use it in a safer way.
>
> TLUD stove separates gas combustion from gasification, and is batch-feed,
> this combination create efficiency and convenience, but also big risk. many
> thing can cause the fire ( gas combustion )  go out, too much or too little
> gas, too much or too little air, temperature too low, (too much or too
> little prmary air, cause too much or too little gas, both can lead to
> extinguish of the secondary combustion), too much moisture in the fuel.
> once the fire go out, great smoke jet out like crazy, poisonous, and the
> fuel is burning inside the inner cylinder like crazy, no easy way to put
> out the first combustion. it is very dangerous and bad situation for
> housewife, neighbors scared by the big smoke, people even can got killed by
> the poisonous gas. (when water can't low down the charcoal temperature,
> water H2O can be turned into poisonous CO gas immediately).
>
> The paragraph above does not express the reality of 40,000 TLUD stove
> users living closely together in We s Bengal, India.   the concerns you
> raise can be presented in "theory", but that is ot the reality.   You are
> writing line the TLUD "deniers" of 5 to 12 years ago.   I heard that over
> and over.   It is in the big New Yorker magazine articles.  Those people
> are not saying such things any more, at least not publically or where their
> comments could leak back to me.
>
> Traditional stove have no such thing, because it is not batch-feeding, not
> burning in a tight closed space. and safer in unexpected situation. it is
> robust. that's why people prefer it over TLUD stove maybe.
>
> I have no clear idea yet, I just typed this message, not thinking it
> thoroughly.
>
> I accept your statement that you are basically not yet well informed or
> with much experience.   Stick with the TLUD stoves.   They are the wave of
> the future.   They can become better, and that is where you and others will
> eventually make important contributions.     --  And there will be many who
> will sit on the sidelines.     ---    Progress in the past few years has
> been great, and getting  better all the time.
>
> I'll sign this message to show my full bias.
>
> Dr TLUD
>
> best regards
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2017-12-02 7:50 GMT+08:00 Nikhil Desai <pienergy2008 at gmail.com>:
>
>> Paul:
>>
>> Capital cost of the stove is a minor issue; the question is whether the
>> users like and use the stove. This is why contextual definitions matter,
>> because pellet production costs can vary greatly depending on the
>> feedstock.
>>
>> A high capital cost stove can be given one-time subsidy - should be given
>> to the distributor if one exists; could be given to a bulk producer - on
>> the condition that the stoves are found useful and used. Metrics of
>> efficiency and hourly emission rates are just smoke.
>>
>> I am glad to read "it is something about family, a cultural thing,
>> especially in country side." Gives the lie to physics-only theories of
>> supposed "stove science".
>>
>> Nikhil
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Cheng and all,   (and a mention of Todd Albi).     see below.
>>>
>>> Doc  /  Dr TLUD  /  Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
>>> Email:  psanders at ilstu.edu
>>> Skype:   paultlud    Phone: +1-309-452-7072 <%28309%29%20452-7072>
>>> Website:  www.drtlud.com
>>>
>>> On 11/29/2017 10:15 PM, lh cheng wrote:
>>>
>>> Another Chinese little project. Surely, it is cookstove, not heater. Too
>>> expensive, 1500RMB (230 USD), in rural area, a big number, very big, no one
>>> buy, not even one, in rural area. For user, many uncertainties to use new
>>> type of stove. if free of charge, a trustworthy friend who is an expert
>>> about this stove, that might be fine.
>>>
>>> I was wondering about the price of that pellet burner stove.  Yes, it is
>>> expensive, but expensive is a relative term.   It could be imported into
>>> America where $230 is inexpensive, but the price here would be so much
>>> higher and it would then be expensive here.
>>>
>>>
>>> stove thing should be open-source ( just like Dr Anderson's Champion
>>> Stove ), DIY, or made by acquaintance, it is something about family, a
>>> cultural thing, especially in country side. In city, electricity or LPG is
>>> enough.
>>>
>>> Is there any prospect in China for DIY.   And what would be the
>>> acceptance of a stove made with thin metal?   Generalizing, it seems that
>>> heavy construction of stoves is the standard in China.   Todd Albi might be
>>> able to shed some light on this.
>>>
>>>
>>> a good approach for stove design maybe is that, basic knowledge of stove
>>> design spread among people, and people help each other.
>>>
>>> What do you have in mind?    in the context of China?   I have
>>> difficulty imagining stove design work in China outside of the factory
>>> context.
>>>
>>>
>>> concerning "stove intervention", during 1959-1961 in China, more than 30
>>> millions of people died because a stove intervention movement. and people
>>> have memories.
>>>
>>> Please provide more information about this statement about 30 million
>>> deaths.
>>>
>>> Welcome to the world of the Stoves Listserv.   We appreciate your
>>> insights.
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>> best regards
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stoves mailing list
>
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email addressstoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web pagehttp://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/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20171203/33650a95/attachment.html>