[Stoves] How other tests calculate with remaining charcoal ... was Re: Advocacy action: ask the GACC to stop promoting the WBT

[Paul Anderson]

Crispin,

The answer to the question you ask me is this.   The char that is 
produced in a TLUD stove is removed and is NOT used in any burning that 
relates to the TLUD stove that made it.   The char comes out. Where it 
goes is not an issue here.

I thank you for your EXCELLENT comments.   Informative.   Long, but that 
is a compliment.  Something useful was written.

However, your reply still does not address my question about char values 
(weight or energy) being used in all those other stove testing 
methods.   I await an answer.

Your comments about about big systems was interesting:
> As far as I know, in general all tests of thermal performance such as 
> power stations, fixed boilers, heating stoves and cooking stoves /in 
> the formal sector/ treat solid resides with energy content remaining 
> as a 'mechanical loss'. That is the definition of a mechanical: 
> unburned fuel that could in theory have been burned ‎but was not, and 
> is left at the end. 
But, really, in the situation of cookstoves, what the formal sector with 
billions of dollars does is only of passing interest. "Mechanical loss" 
is something like the smear of food remaining on a dinner plate after a 
hearty meal.  Just wash it off, dry the plate, and life goes on.

However, in the cookstove world, where char is INTENTIONALLY CREATED AND 
SAVED, it is not a mechanical loss.   It is a purposeful gain, something 
that is desired.   Or at least not to be used as a penalty, as a way to 
make the stove appear less desirable.

I have been reading Ron's replies to Xavier and to Crispin.  The WBT 
might be terrible, horrible, worse than no test at all, as judged by 
some errors.          BUT TO GIVE CREDIT FOR CHARCOAL AS "UN-USED 
ENERGY" IS NOT AN ERROR, especially when the char is in such a 
significant quantity and is intentionally made and gathered.

Unless better evidence is provided, please do not use the calculations 
involving charcoal (subtraction in the denominator) as a major arguement 
against the WBT.

And:
> The question remains,
>> I would greatly appreciate some knowledgeable comments about how 
>> THOSE OTHER TESTS handle the issue of charcoal that is left in the 
>> stoves.   Is there some agreement between those many tests? 
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 1/22/2017 9:16 PM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott wrote:
> Dear Paul
>
> As far as I know, in general all tests of thermal performance such as 
> power stations, fixed boilers, heating stoves and cooking stoves /in 
> the formal sector/ treat solid resides with energy content remaining 
> as a 'mechanical loss'. That is the definition of a mechanical: 
> unburned fuel that could in theory have been burned ‎but was not, and 
> is left at the end. The exceptions to this, in terms of rating the 
> thermal efficiency, are the WBT and it's derivatives such as the 
> Enhanced Precision Test Protocol and it's later evolution.
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170123/692e0d09/attachment.html>