[Stoves] China and cookstoves [Was Re: A user-centered, iterative engineering approach for advanced biomass cookstove design and development]

[franke at cruzio.com]

Nikhil, Stovers,
The goal of stove designing is a stove that will use only the energy
required and placed at the location it is needed. The TLUD is a fine
precision machinery that does just that.

As to what people care about and not will differ from people to people and
location. You give just one example and I am sure that is true for some
people at some location. But I really don’t care. Its not something of
concern to me.

The TLUDD extracting the volatile energy required and locating it under
the pot where released results in the following:
1)	Cooler (safer) stove because the char is not combusted.
2)	Cooks not cooking over a hot stove
3)	Cooks not cooking in a real hot room
4)	Char left can be used in another stove
5)	Char left is much better for ag soil than high oxides and carbonates
found in ash
6)	Much easier to lite than a Rocket type stove
7)	Much more predictable than a Rocket type stove.

All the above is, or can be, true once we control the fuel and delivery
(packing for the TLUD). This done by deciding the properties of biomass
important and test methods used to evaluate them and certified labs shown
to be able to conduct the tests.

The Rocket Stove is – well – so Yesterday
Frank
Gabilan Laboratory





> Frank:
>
> Users may not care if energy is wasted.
>
> In fact, I have seen only minor evidence that they do. Most of it is
> anecdotal or indirect - whether the old stoves from China we saw pictures
> of (from Todd, I believe) and other stoves were this size of that, this
> kind of airflow or that.
>
> It is not the valuation put on wasted energy but rather the capital cost
> of
> equipment, operating cost and hassle factors, that impede transition to
> allegedly more efficient stoves.
>
> I repeat - there is no evidence that minimizing energy waste has any
> particular consequence for anything. Much energy is wasted, simply because
> it is too costly to save energy.
>
> This, after all, was the teaching in home economics --- a woman
> multi-tasks
> in keeping a home, and has to save on everything - money, her time, food
> ingredients,fuel - and has to continually optimize and re-optimize her
> behavior so she can place food on the table (or floor), and also has to
> feed little children by her own hands.
>
> I argue that it is understanding the home economy of poor people -- not
> just doing surveys and concocting statistics -- that would explain why
> there hasn't been much uptake of "improved stoves".
>
> Counting beans and Btus is about the same. Theory says one thing, reality
> is different.
>
> Nikhil
>
> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 10:43 PM, Frank Shields <travel at skyhighway.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Ron,
>>
>> I'm thinking stoves not making char is wasting energy. If you have a
>> stove
>> that can complete a task and make char you are using all parts of the
>> biomass to the best advantage. Much of the heat produced going from
>> char-C
>> to gas-CO is left in the stove body - not cooking food. If you can
>> produce
>> a good flame at the secondary where the food is cooked without the need
>> to
>> have a very hot stove to produce the right gasses for complete
>> combustion
>> you can save the biomass (char) left for other uses and not the need to
>> oxidize it to ash.  And the TLUD seems to be able to do that!
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>> Frank
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
>