[Stoves] Economics of (bio)char (incl. stoves perspective)

Paul Anderson psanders at ilstu.edu
Mon Dec 4 11:15:50 MST 2017


Gordon,

I changed the Subject line because this is no longer about
> Re: [Stoves] China and cookstoves [Was Re: A user-centered, iterative 
> engineering approach for advanced biomass cookstove design and 
> development]
And I included the Biochar Listser.    Discussions can be separate on 
each list.

The issue does relate to Stoves because it impacts the economics of how 
to get the stoves paid for.

You wrote:
> the biochar that is produced from our TLUD appliances is worth many 
> times more that the biomass feedstock going in. This is true on a 
> triple-bottom-line basis, 
and
> In the U.S. we have the numbers to show that we can make a business 
> out of this approach. 
Please provide more info.  I hope that "the numbers" can be shared. 
Currently are they on paper, and not in some business that must protect 
its investments?

I am writing as a friendly believer in what you have written about TLUD 
technology and char / biochar.  I  want to be supportive, and would like 
more info.  And as you point out, there are at least two main 
perspectives:  developed societies (such as USA) and developing 
societies (of great interest to me and some others.)

And how can there be a game plan to put the proposal to the test? Issues 
of scale will be very important, and big money might be essential.    
Please enlighten me (us).

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 12/4/2017 11:28 AM, Gordon West wrote:
> I want to support Ron in his point and to provide a scenario to help 
> to explain it. We are a relatively new ‘stoves’ R&D company and 
> manufacturer operating in the U.S. Our business plan is not directly 
> relevant to the markets that are the major focus of this list, but 
> there are some significant developments in our world carrying what 
> should be a disruptive lesson for biomass cooking strategies.
>
> The basic lesson, which we are creating a business model for, is this: 
> the biochar that is produced from our TLUD appliances is worth many 
> times more that the biomass feedstock going in. This is true on a 
> triple-bottom-line basis, looking at direct economics, social 
> benefits, and environmental benefits - note that global economic 
> systems generally acknowledge only only transactions involving sale 
> for currency as “making money” even though the other non-monetized 
> benefits result in greater lifecycle economic good than the direct 
> sales do.
>
> First let me make the distinction between fuel and feedstock - this is 
> a very important point. Fuel is burned for energy; feedstock is used 
> to make other products. In our TLUD process, biomass is always 
> feedstock, from which is produced char and a flammable gas (a fuel).
>
> One problem with micro-production of biochar (cookstoves and heaters 
> in households) is that the char does not have enough value to cover 
> the cost of aggregation and sale to existing markets - and existing 
> markets are poorly developed, partly because of a lack of supply. Our 
> solution is to establish community scale biochar+heat systems that 
> acquire local biomass for feedstock, process it into char and heat, 
> use the heat to dry more incoming biomass, and densify it into pellet 
> or briquet feedstock. The densified and bagged feedstock can then be 
> distributed to micro-producers to make heat for cooking or other uses 
> while making more char. We plan to give the micro-producers /free 
> dried and densified feedstock/ in trade for their char. “We”, in this 
> case, will be a regional biochar cooperative that will handle 
> technology distribution and operation, biomass processing and 
> feedstock distribution, and biochar aggregation and marketing.
>
> This approach solves many problems - the households get free 
> feedstock, saving significant amounts of time and money; the feedstock 
> is of a much higher quality - it is dry and consistent and dense, 
> making stove operation safer and better; the char is aggregated into a 
> marketable form; carbon is sequestered; adding CO2 to the atmosphere 
> is avoided; soils and biomass productivity is enhanced; and water is 
> saved. There are many more benefits, but those are some top examples.
>
> In the U.S. we have the numbers to show that we can make a business 
> out of this approach. In more distressed areas, governments and NGOs, 
> who have more of an interest in the non-monetized triple-bottom-line 
> benefits, could set up the core biochar+heat facilities to produce 
> free feedstock for micro-producers and manage the char collection. The 
> subsidies to do this would actually be long-term investments, and not 
> bandaids like so many ‘help for the poor’ efforts are.
>
> Burning local biomass to ash in cookstoves for heat does not really 
> solve any fundamental lifecycle problems, no matter how cleanly it is 
> done.
>
> Gordon West
> The Trollworks
> 503 N. “E” Street
> Silver City, NM 88061
> 575-537-3689
>
> /An entrepreneur sees problems as the seeds of opportunity./
>
>
>
>
>
>> On Dec 3, 2017, at 10:36 PM, Ronal W. Larson 
>> <rongretlarson at comcast.net <mailto:rongretlarson at comcast.net>> wrote:
>>
>> Nikhil:
>>
>> I hope you (and almost everybody on this list) will take the time to 
>> ask a few low-income women the below-question that I have not seen 
>> asked.
>>
>>  If you could imagine yourself having a batch stove that cost the 
>> same and used the same fuel whether you (now low income) would rather 
>> make money or not, what would your own answer be?
>>
>> None of your answer below gets at what I am asking.  I repeat;  I 
>> have not seen any survey with this question.  I have talked to many 
>> people about this for twenty-plus years individually - and I have 
>> gotten the answer that I want others to get.
>>
>> Obviously I am asking this so as to get char in the ground. 
>>  Obviously for climate reasons.  But soil NPP improvement also occurs 
>> - without conflict.  All this is obvious on the sister biochar list. 
>>  I am trying to get this list aware of biochar as a positive part of 
>> stoves and cooking.  It is of no help to hear your answers about fuel 
>> collection, making observations, cooks making money with kerosene 
>> stoves,  non-wood stoves taking over, large-scale cooking , etc. 
>>  None of your answers get at the question of the value in making char 
>> while one cooks.  It is not a difficult question to answer.
>>
>>
>> Ron
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 3, 2017, at 8:48 PM, Nikhil Desai <pienergy2008 at gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:pienergy2008 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ron:
>>>
>>> That is an interesting question but the answer has to be compared to 
>>> alternative means of making money.
>>>
>>> Reduction in fuel collection time is one form of saving; the time 
>>> freed up can be used for higher-priority activity, including 
>>> education, child care, or employment.
>>>
>>> In other words, answers to this question can only be interpreted 
>>> with additional, context-specific information or questions. In and 
>>> of itself, it is a meaningless question.
>>>
>>> There are indirect ways of gathering people's priorities -- 
>>> observing what they in fact do.
>>>
>>> Here is what I have observed over the last several decades:
>>>
>>> 1. In India, housewives in cities and towns have indeed made money 
>>> by cooking, though on kerosene and LPG/electricity and preparing 
>>> dry/canned/frozen foods as well as fresh meals and snacks for sale.
>>>
>>> 2. Roughly a billion people in the developing world have moved away 
>>> from collecting woodfuels and cooking all the meals for family 
>>> consumption.
>>>
>>> 3. Family size and composition, location, alternatives and 
>>> priorities in use of women's time have changed.
>>>
>>> 4. Charcoaling from own or others' trees is an income-generating 
>>> activity, but whether a cook wants to spend her time to do the same 
>>> is open to question. She might well want to do for selling locally 
>>> as fuel but not to some central authority for biochar.
>>>
>>> Your question may be better directed to commercial, large-scale 
>>> cooks, who are probably easier customers for biomass and coal stoves 
>>> anyway compared to poor households.
>>>
>>> Nikhil
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Nikhil Desai
>>> (US +1) 202 568 5831
>>> /Skype: nikhildesai888/
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Ronal W. Larson 
>>> <rongretlarson at comcast.net <mailto:rongretlarson at comcast.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     Paul:
>>>
>>>     I have yet to see on ANY stove questionnaire:  “How important is
>>>     making (more than saving) money when you cook?”
>>>
>>>     Ron
>>>
>>>
>>>>     On Dec 3, 2017, at 8:41 AM, Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu
>>>>     <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>     Crispin,
>>>>
>>>>     Good point.
>>>>
>>>>     I wonder how ofter "pride of ownership" is included in the
>>>>     evaluations.
>>>>
>>>>     I hope that such a quesiton can be asked to the 40,000 (or a
>>>>     sample) users of the Champion TLUD stove in West Bengal.
>>>>
>>>>     About surveys and questionnaires and interviews, (whether for
>>>>     stoves or other topics), questions keep being changed, so
>>>>     comparison between results are often difficult or meaningless
>>>>     because of wording.   Are there some common (shared) questions
>>>>     that tend to be used in stove surveys?
>>>>
>>>>     Paul
>>>>
>>>>     Doc  /  Dr TLUD  /  Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
>>>>     Email:psanders at ilstu.edu <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>
>>>>     Skype:   paultlud    Phone:+1-309-452-7072 <tel:%28309%29%20452-7072>
>>>>     Website:www.drtlud.com <http://www.drtlud.com/>
>>>>     On 12/3/2017 5:35 AM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott wrote:
>>>>>     In the survey of potential stove users conducted in Gauteng
>>>>>     2004, "Pride of ownership" scored above price and fuel
>>>>>     consumption in a ranking of features.
>>>>>
>>>>>     Philip confirms this aspect of reality in the South African
>>>>>     market.
>>>>>
>>>>>     Regards
>>>>>     Crispin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     “Capital cost of the stove is a minor issue; the question is
>>>>>     whether the users like and use the stove.” A community I
>>>>>     studied carefully had a monthly household income of <$100 yet
>>>>>     strove to buy a smokey cast iron coal-fired stove costing
>>>>>     ~$400.  It met all their needs – including a higher social
>>>>>     status merely because they possessed such a stove.
>>>>>
>>>>>     Prof Philip Lloyd
>>>>>     Energy Institute, CPUT
>>>>>     PO Box 1906
>>>>>     Bellville 7535
>>>>>     Tel 021 959 4323
>>>>>     Cell 083 441 5247
>>>>>     PA Nadia 021 959 4330
>>>>>
>>>>>     *From:*Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>>>>     <mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org>]*On Behalf
>>>>>     Of*Nikhil Desai
>>>>>     *Sent:*Saturday, December 2, 2017 1:50 AM
>>>>>     *To:*Paul Anderson
>>>>>     *Cc:*Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
>>>>>     *Subject:*Re: [Stoves] China and cookstoves [Was Re: A
>>>>>     user-centered, iterative engineering approach for advanced
>>>>>     biomass cookstove design and development]
>>>>>
>>>>>     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 <mailto: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 <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>
>>>>>     Skype:   paultlud    Phone:+1-309-452-7072 <tel:%28309%29%20452-7072>
>>>>>     Website:www.drtlud.com
>>>>>     <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.drtlud.com&data=02%7C01%7Ccrispinpigott%40outlook.com%7C62b2f8c8c9bf4c43283c08d53a40c4b8%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636478972205853695&sdata=PbkCfNM6hUmnmoyj1uEbhKXufYiC9MFTSc3ueAqhjNU%3D&reserved=0>
>>>>>     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 address
>>>>>     stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>>>>     <mailto: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
>>>>>     <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/
>>>>>     <http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>>     Stoves mailing list
>>>>
>>>>     to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>>>>     stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>>>     <mailto: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
>>>>     <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/
>>>>     <http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Stoves mailing list
>>
>> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>> stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org <mailto: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/
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20171204/45be945a/attachment.html>


More information about the Stoves mailing list